Hi Petrit,
Tks for the impact analysis!
However, I think there are some aspects not well covered.
1) It is clear, unless you can provide stats about that, that we don't really
know if the 92.5% of the automated validations check are *really* correct in
the sense of being able to receive emails (due to mistakes, or on purpose), as
some % may be reaching a null in-box, a mailbox that bounces because is full, a
mailbox that bounces because is misconfigured, etc. As a consequence of that,
the current validation is not really fulfilling the actual purpose of the
RIPE-705, because "it is required to contain ... which is intended for
receiving ...". If emails can't be received at least a % of the 92.5% is not
being validated.
2) Maybe I got it wrong, but I think it is important to see the progress of
tickets that where needed to open in different passes of RIPE-705. It is
expected that in each pass you have less and less failing abuse-c mailboxes,
right? Otherwise, it will be an indication that some LIRs aren't really doing
the job to comply with RIPE-705.
3) Just to make it clear: Changing the validation period is let on-purpose, as
an operational aspect to the RIPE NCC. I think it is a feature, not an issue.
This also allows a slow-start, as RIPE NCC did with the implementation of
RIPE-705, so it allows to avoid the extra overload indicated in the IA. May be
a full year or even 1.5-2 years are needed in the first pass. Not an issue, you
can accommodate the internal process to the available man power for manual
follow up.
4) The proposal doesn't specify that you need to run all the validations on the
same day. I expect the system to be smart, and for example consider an even
split of validations per day, which you can tune, depending on what happened
every previous week, so not to overload the resources needed for manual follow
up. This is also in line which 3 above, and I understand is also the way
RIPE-705 was implemented (at least initially).
5) I really feel that expecting that 32.000 tickets for each round will be
created is very exaggerated. If that's the case, that will probe my point 1
above and indicate that we have a real problem. Even if that's the case, a
smart slow-start process will not require 10 times the actual FTEs vs the
current level. Again, it is important to insist that it should be done smartly
and, in that sense, it is a huge mistake, in my opinion, not considering it in
the IA, because it provides a very biased view.
6) Even if it is the case that in the first round we have 32.000 tickets, this
is temporary, because following years will not be the same, otherwise, we have
a different kind of problem with policy compliance.
One possible indication of if this really creates so much trouble, even if all
the validations are sent on the same "day", will be to ask to APNIC, which
already implemented a much stricter proposal a year ago, if I recall correctly.
I understand that it is just an indication, different culture, NIR there/no
here, etc., etc. LACNIC is on their way as well, but I don't know when it will
be implemented yet.
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
El 20/7/20 15:08, "anti-abuse-wg en nombre de Petrit Hasani"
<anti-abuse-wg-boun...@ripe.net en nombre de phas...@ripe.net> escribió:
Dear colleagues,
Policy proposal 2019-04, "Validation of "abuse-mailbox"", is now in the
Review Phase.
This proposal aims to have the RIPE NCC validate "abuse-c:” information
more often and introduces a new validation process.
The RIPE NCC has prepared an impact analysis to support the community’s
discussion.
You can find the proposal and impact analysis at:
https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2019-04
https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2019-04#impact-analysis
And the draft documents at:
https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2019-04/draft
As per the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP), the purpose of this four
week Review Phase is to continue discussion of the proposal, taking the impact
analysis into consideration, and to review the full draft RIPE Policy Document.
At the end of the Review Phase, the working group chairs will determine
whether the WG has reached rough consensus. It is therefore important to
provide your opinion, even if it is simply a restatement of your input from the
previous phase.
We encourage you to read the proposal, impact analysis and draft document
and send any comments to <anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net> before 18 August 2020.
Kind regards,
--
Petrit Hasani
Policy Officer
RIPE NCC
**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company
This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the
individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure,
copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if
partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be
considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware
that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly
prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the
original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
