This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/

[db-wg] [anti-abuse-wg] objection to RIPE policy proposal 2016-01

• Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] [anti-abuse-wg] objection to RIPE policy proposal 2016-01
• Next message (by thread): [db-wg] [training] RIPE NCC Training Courses April-June 2016

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Florian Weimer fw at deneb.enyo.de
Mon Feb 29 22:06:55 CET 2016

* Ruediger Volk:

> No PDP is needed to send friendly invitations to legacy holders to
> populate their data objects with abuse-c information; I'm sure
> asking the RIPE NCC to do this would not create an undue burden or
> serious problem.

How is 2016-01 different from sending such notices?  The net effect
seems to be about the same.

The interesting question (with either approach) is what RIPE NCC
should do if it has proof that the contact information in the RIPE
database is incorrect.

• Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] [anti-abuse-wg] objection to RIPE policy proposal 2016-01
• Next message (by thread): [db-wg] [training] RIPE NCC Training Courses April-June 2016

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

[ db-wg Archives ]