On 23/03/2019 13:31, Nick Hilliard wrote:
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via anti-abuse-wg wrote on 22/03/2019 22:55:
The legal bindings of the NCC already have that for those that don’t
follow existing policies, don’t pay bills, etc. So, the proposal is
adding in the table a policy for confirming what is a hijack
according to the community consensus. Same way we did for how we
distribute resources, do transfers, etc.
Hi Jordi,
couple of things:
1. it's not the job of the RIPE NCC to make up for a short-fall of
civil legislation in this area, no matter how distasteful we might
find the consequences of this;
Purity of concept will result in massive gov't intervention since we
will have shown that we don't know how to self-regulate.
The voices are already there:
https://hackernoon.com/why-the-internet-must-be-regulated-9d65031e7491
If you have an alternative solution, not even a better one, please
suggest it.
Regards,
Hank
