Re: [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 59, Issue 7

2016-09-06 Thread Gunther Nitzsche
Hi, (long answer again..:-/ ) On 09/06/2016 08:21 AM, ox wrote: > On Tue, 6 Sep 2016 07:08:05 +0100 > Richard Clayton wrote: >>> "The non sanctioned use of a resource to infringe upon the usage >>> rights of another resource" >>> >>> (1) Resource >>> Any Internet

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 59, Issue 7

2016-09-06 Thread ox
On Tue, 6 Sep 2016 07:08:05 +0100 Richard Clayton wrote: > >"The non sanctioned use of a resource to infringe upon the usage > >rights of another resource" > > > >(1) Resource > >Any Internet Resource > > that's a recursive definition -- which doesn't assist much >

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 59, Issue 7

2016-09-06 Thread ox
On Tue, 6 Sep 2016 07:49:54 +0200 ox wrote: > On Tue, 6 Sep 2016 07:37:32 +0200 > ox wrote: > > > you've missed my point > > I have not. > > > you define abuse as "non sanctioned" activity... that is, > > > activity for which permission has not been granted.

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 59, Issue 7

2016-09-06 Thread Richard Clayton
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 In message , ox writes >== >Definition of Internet abuse >== > >"The non sanctioned use of a resource to infringe upon the usage rights >of another resource" >

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 59, Issue 7

2016-09-05 Thread ox
On Tue, 6 Sep 2016 07:37:32 +0200 ox wrote: > > you've missed my point > I have not. > > you define abuse as "non sanctioned" activity... that is, activity > > for which permission has not been granted. Fair enough (so far as > > it goes) > > > I do no such thing... > > you then

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 59, Issue 7

2016-09-05 Thread ox
On Tue, 6 Sep 2016 03:41:56 +0100 Richard Clayton wrote: > In message , ox writes > >Dealing with your first point, I do agree and you are imho, quite > >correct about the abuse from legacy resources. > no -- I was concerned about abuse OF legacy resources

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 59, Issue 7

2016-09-05 Thread Richard Clayton
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 In message , ox writes >Dealing with your first point, I do agree and you are imho, quite >correct about the abuse from legacy resources. no -- I was concerned about abuse OF legacy resources :( >However, the current definition of

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 59, Issue 7

2016-09-04 Thread ox
Richard, Dealing with your first point, I do agree and you are imho, quite correct about the abuse from legacy resources. However, the current definition of Internet abuse is: --> use of a resource to infringe upon the usage rights of another resource So, this caters exactly for ALL resources,

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 59, Issue 7

2016-09-04 Thread Richard Clayton
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 In message , ox writes >== >Definition of Internet abuse >== > >"The non sanctioned use of a resource to infringe upon the usage rights >of another resource" >

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 59, Issue 7

2016-09-02 Thread ox
On Fri, 2 Sep 2016 12:38:39 -0300 "Marilson" wrote: > Herr Volker, me and Andre are only showing one type of abuse. I think > you agree that we are succeeding. Marilson > Which is why there is a desperate need to define what exactly is Internet Abuse, in terms of this

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 59, Issue 7

2016-09-02 Thread Marilson
Herr Volker, me and Andre are only showing one type of abuse. I think you agree that we are succeeding. Marilson From: anti-abuse-wg-requ...@ripe.net Sent: Friday, September 02, 2016 11:31 AM To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net Subject: anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 59, Issue 7 Send anti-abuse-wg mailing