In message <alpine.lrh.2.21.1904180803120.19...@gauntlet.corp.fccn.pt>, Carlos Friaças <cfria...@fccn.pt> writes > >On Thu, 18 Apr 2019, Richard Clayton wrote: >
>> ... I am aware of peer pressure (literally), action by IXPs, action by >> organisations providing reputation scores and even action by hosting >> companies. > >Yes, i'm aware of that too. Sometimes it fixes specific hijacks, but does >it stop or in anyway cause a delay for hijackers to hop onto the next >hijack...??? All of examples I gave come from my experience in putting a stop to various actors hijacking address space. Now it may be that the same actors have come back and found another completely different hosting company to carry their hijacks -- but getting them to start again from scratch has always looked like a win to me. In particular there is nothing like being thrown off an IXP for putting a crimp in your operations. There's real money involved. I advised you before to give up on getting RIPE to develop a completely new approach to tackling abuse (especially since it really is not going all that well) -- and instead to put your effort into getting IXPs to develop robust policies in this space. After all IXPs and routing are a far better fit that an RIR and routing. >> hijacks are reported in numerous places, the NANOG mailing list springs >> immediately to mind -- and posting there is certainly easy > >Yes i'm aware about it, but is that the (globally?) de-facto place for >raising anyone's attention to an hijack or an hijacker operation? it's not ideal from a global perspective, but it is certainly the de- facto place at the moment -- richard Richard Clayton Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. Benjamin Franklin 11 Nov 1755
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
