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

Hi Gert

I am sorry but I TOTALLY disagree with you here. You have a very old 
fashioned view of both the registry and the 'management' of the internet 
by some bottom up, open, transparent, industry/community driven process.

I make no apologies here for doing another Donald Trump. I am going to 
say what needs to be said, regardless of what people think about what I say.

Your view is typical of people who have been involved in this industry 
for a very long time. You probably remember the days when the internet 
was an 'old boys club' and everyone involved in the development knew 
each other. That was last century....we have moved on since then. The 
internet now impacts in some way on the lives of almost every person on 
this planet. It is part of the critical infrastructure of 21st century 
life at every level.

There is much political interest now in how the internet is managed. 
Someone has to take responsibility for this management. The ITU and many 
governments are seriously interested in getting their hands on this 
management. But the RIRs and other technical/user interest groups are 
still able to show a responsible approach to managing a global 
infrastructure.

The public finds abuse on the internet a serious problem. Not just spam 
but the more serious criminal aspects like phishing. This can destroy 
people's lives. Politicians are all self interested. If they can grab 
hold of a public concern and make campaigns out of it then it benefits 
their careers. The more technical people play down the impact of 
handling abuse on the internet and show they really don't want to be 
bothered in handling it, the more you play into their hands in the long 
term.

The RIRs have to be much more involved these days in internet governance 
and the handling of issues like abuse concerns. Whether you like it or 
not these are real concerns for the registries now. So either you 
surrender control to governments through the ITU and accept a very 
different internet to what we have now, or you move with the times and 
embrace the political and responsible management concerns of a 21st 
century, global resource.

The more I hear long term, experienced internet people like yourself and 
Randy constantly criticising the role of the RIRs and wishing for the 
old days, the more I fear for the future of the internet.

cheers
denis


On 03/03/2016 19:54, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 12:56:05PM +0200, andre at ox.co.za wrote:
>> it is actually very simple:
>>
>> any rigorously correct resource allocation registry data must
>> include accurate abuse records.
>
> No.  It needs to contain accurate records of who has been delegated
> responsibility for that (admin-c / org).
>
> abuse-c is a way to ease finding the *right* contacts instead of always
> having to write paper mail to the company CEO - and that makes sense,
> but it's a convenience to operators (as is tech-c), and in no means
> required for the function as registry.
>
> Which might conincide with the fact that the paperwork you sign when
> opening a LIR has no field for abuse-c...
>
> Gert Doering
>          -- NetMaster
>