<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
</head>
<body>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">And includes much more due diligence in IP allocation and membership procedures, hopefully </div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="ms-outlook-mobile-signature">
<div><br>
</div>
<div style="direction: ltr;">--srs</div>
</div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%" tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" style="font-size:11pt" color="#000000"><b>From:</b> anti-abuse-wg <anti-abuse-wg-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg <anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, May 10, 2024 11:51:13 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net <anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div>
<p>Hi Leo</p>
<p>It's more about sharpening the focus. I colored this red below. I feel eventually the RIPE NCC must adapt stronger policies to punish non-action or disregard of action. I think it would be better if this WG comes up with such policies which the RIPE NCC
can then adopt (or not) rather than the RIPE NCC having to react to external pressure, e.g. from policy makers, in particular the EU. I'm sure one can formulate this much better. I firmly believe, that there is no way around stronger regulation, and I'd much
rather see this coming from this community than form the outside. The regulators i see and work with are increasingly irritated and react with totally inadequate demands, which I wont reproduce here.<br>
</p>
<ol>
<li>Identifying and analyzing emerging security threats and vulnerabilities affecting Internet infrastructure.<br>
</li><li>Collaborating with stakeholders, <font color="#ff0004">in particular the RIPE community</font>, to develop and advocate
<font color="#ff0004">and implement</font> best practices, guidelines, and standards for securing Internet resources.</li><li>Facilitating information sharing and cooperation among network operators, law enforcement, and relevant entities to mitigate security risks.</li><li>Providing education, training, and outreach initiatives to raise awareness of security issues and promote best practices adoption.</li><li><font color="#ff0004">Develop policies recommendations to the RIPE NCC that help enforcing good behavior and sanction disregard for faccepted security standards. This includes the definition of acceptable minimal standards.
</font><br>
</li></ol>
<p></p>
<div class="x_moz-cite-prefix">Best regards</div>
<div class="x_moz-cite-prefix">Serge<br>
</div>
<div class="x_moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="x_moz-cite-prefix">On 09.05.24 21:39, Leo Vegoda wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="x_moz-quote-pre">Hi Serge,
On Thu, 9 May 2024 at 11:41, Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg
<a class="x_moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net"><anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="x_moz-quote-pre">
Hi Leo
We can only recommend the community, obviously.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="x_moz-quote-pre">
I agree.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="x_moz-quote-pre">So these aare the best
practices
We can recommend that RIPE NCC changes its rules and procedures to
address certain issues.
As a WG, if I'm correct we have no other power.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="x_moz-quote-pre">
Based on thisl, I don't understand what's missing from the draft text.
Maybe you could suggest some specific edits?
Kind regards,
Leo
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="x_moz-signature" cols="72">--
Dr. Serge Droz
Member, FIRST Board of Directors
<a class="x_moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.first.org">https://www.first.org</a></pre>
</div>
</body>
</html>