[anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

I remember the igf being described as a “talking shop” once.  This wg is on much the same lines with the added disadvantage that the topics of discussion tend to repeat themselves with monotonous regularity over the decade or more that I’ve been on this list as many of you folks have.

Unless the actual issues that keep coming up are identified and suggestions put in place to resolve them, I can’t see this rechartering do much more than expand the scope of what people gripe about here from spam to ddos, malware c2 and such, with much the same results as any hope for something actionable coming up.


--srs
________________________________
From: Nick Hilliard <nick at foobar.org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2024 2:26:35 PM
To: Serge Droz <serge.droz at first.org>
Cc: Michele Neylon - Blacknight <michele at blacknight.com>; Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists at gmail.com>; anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net <anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net>
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

Serge,

The first step is for the WG to reach some consensus about what it ought to recharter to. There's a bunch of topics for a potential new security-wg which seem to be broadly acceptable to people on the WG, and another set of suggestions relating to telling the RIPE NCC to turn itself into an enforcement body, which has never reached consensus over the years.

The question for the WG is whether to move forward with rechartering to what it can agree on or - once again - get bogged down on what it can't. This is where the problem is.

Nick

Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg wrote on 13/05/2024 17:18:
That's fine. The WG can make suggestions, RIPE NCC considers this, and if necessary asks the members, possibly explaining, or asking the WG to explain why the change makes sense. Most people are sensible.

I don't see where there is a problem.

Best
Serge

On 13.05.24 16:11, Michele Neylon - Blacknight wrote:
Suresh

It might be helpful to discuss this with them. I’m sure there are **some** things that they could do without putting it to the members, but there’s a lot of things that would need member agreement in order to change.

Regards

Michele

--

Mr Michele Neylon

Blacknight Solutions

Hosting, Colocation & Domains

https://www.blacknight.com/ <https://www.blacknight.com/><https://www.blacknight.com/>

https://blacknight.blog/ <https://blacknight.blog/><https://blacknight.blog/>

Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072

Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090

Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ <https://michele.blog/><https://michele.blog/>

Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ <https://ceo.hosting/><https://ceo.hosting/>

-------------------------------

Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland  Company No.: 370845

I have sent this email at a time that is convenient for me. I do not expect you to respond to it outside of your usual working hours.

*From: *anti-abuse-wg <anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net><mailto:anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net> on behalf of Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists at gmail.com><mailto:ops.lists at gmail.com>
*Date: *Monday, 13 May 2024 at 14:44
*To: *Serge Droz <serge.droz at first.org><mailto:serge.droz at first.org>
*Cc: *anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net <anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net><mailto:anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net>
*Subject: *Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

*[EXTERNAL EMAIL]*Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised sources.

RIPE NCC doesn’t really need member input or consensus to change a lot of this. Certainly not in tightening or enforcing due diligence procedures rather than charging 50 euro an ASN

—srs

------------------------------------------------------------------------

*From:*anti-abuse-wg <anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net><mailto:anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net> on behalf of Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg <anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net><mailto:anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net>
*Sent:* Monday, May 13, 2024 7:03:18 PM
*Cc:* anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net<mailto:anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net> <anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net><mailto:anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net>
*Subject:* Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

Hi Michele


RIPE currently does not have the power to do a lot of things. The WG cannot magically change that.


This is the old merry go round.

Maybe RIPE NCC needs to change certain things, or it will be changed for
them. The WG could provide guidance and suggest possible avenues where
RIPE needs/should change. RIPE can then still ignore that. Believe it or
not: Organizations can change.

So if you say you don't want to discuss this, fine. But don't blame it
RIPE not being able to change.

Best
Serge

--
Dr. Serge Droz
Member, FIRST Board of Directors
https://www.first.org <https://www.first.org><https://www.first.org>

--

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://mailman.ripe.net/ <https://mailman.ripe.net/><https://mailman.ripe.net/>



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20240514/f85a79f5/attachment.html>