In message <db7pr06mb50173157978d7621c6c0c11294...@db7pr06mb5017.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com>, Brian Nisbet <brian.nis...@heanet.ie> wrote:
>My comments about the apnic-talk address was that I wasn't sure if that list >was used to the kind of content, and I was worried that it might not get >Ronald's message where it would it best for it to go... I've looked around and frankly, the pickings, when it comes to APNIC mailing lists, are rather on the lean/sparse side. That region doesn't have a "abuse" working group or mailing list. It does have a "Routing Security" Special Interest Group (SIG) and an associated mailing lists for that, and you're right, Brian, that I might have been better off to send my notice there, rather than sending it to apnic-talk, as I did do, but then again it could be argued, albeit a bit tongue-in-cheek, that what I posted had more to do with routing IN-security than it did with routing security, per se. Not that any of this matters much anyway. As I have been infomred several thousand times, none of the RIRs are "the Internet Police" and thus all are utterly powerless to even so much as officially -care- about such matters. But given the general difficulty of finding anybody anywhere who cares about such events/schemes, I confess that I do have a tendency to just shout into the wind and hope that someone somwhere who has the authority to act will see what I have written, will care, and will act. Regards, rfg
