Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Policy Proposal Withdrawn (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
> I disagree that it did not reach consensus. There was never any proper > measure of whether it reached consensus. i will admit to being lazy/busy and have not looked at pdp to confirm. but ... i believe that the way we measure consensus is by looking at the faces of the co-chairs. that's why they get the big . the ietf keeps going around the concensus issue (going around in circles is a deep expertise of the ietf). rfc 7282 is a helpful product. randy
Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Policy Proposal Withdrawn (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
Jordi, Thank you, yes, we're aware of that, and I know you know the PDP quite well, but I felt it was worth stating the relevant piece for others. We will be back to you soon. Brian Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG Brian Nisbet Service Operations Manager HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network 1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland +35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270 From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ Sent: Wednesday 9 September 2020 10:21 To: Brian Nisbet ; anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Policy Proposal Withdrawn (Validation of "abuse-mailbox") CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Brian, I’ve already sent you (and the co-chairs and policy officer) my rational for disagreement yesterday. I’m not sure if I need to copy to the list (I will read the PDP for refreshing myself on the appeals process later on today) or how much I should wait for your response before (if needed, hopefully not), starting an appeal. Regards, Jordi @jordipalet El 9/9/20 10:54, "anti-abuse-wg en nombre de Brian Nisbet" mailto:anti-abuse-wg-boun...@ripe.net> en nombre de brian.nis...@heanet.ie<mailto:brian.nis...@heanet.ie>> escribió: Morning, If you have specific disagreements with the Co-Chairs, then please contact us at aa-wg-ch...@ripe.net with the your reasoning for 2019-04 has reached consensus. The appeals procedure beyond that is detailed in RIPE 710 and I have copied & pasted the specific paragraph here: "If a grievance cannot be resolved with the chair of the WG the matter can be brought to the attention of the Working Group Chairs Collective (WGCC). Anyone may submit an appeal. This must be submitted to the relevant WG mailing list(s) and to the Policy Announce Mailing List (policy-annou...@ripe.net). The appeal will also be published by the RIPE NCC at appropriate locations on the RIPE web site. Any appeal should include a detailed and specific description of the issues and clearly explain why the appeal was submitted. An appeal must be submitted no later than four weeks after the appealable action has occurred. The WGCC will decide by consensus whether to uphold or reject appeals which have been submitted. The decision of the WGCC should be reached no later than four weeks of an appeal being made. Interested parties shall recuse themselves from any discussion or decision within the WGCC relating to the appeal. If the dispute cannot be resolved by the decision of the WGCC, the issue should be brought to the RIPE Chair. The decision of the RIPE Chair will be final." The WGCC can be contacted at wg-cha...@ripe.net However the first step is to contact the WG Chairs for AA-WG with an argument against our decision. Thanks, Brian Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG Brian Nisbet Service Operations Manager HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network 1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland +35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270 From: anti-abuse-wg on behalf of JJS JJS Sent: Wednesday 9 September 2020 02:37 To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Policy Proposal Withdrawn (Validation of "abuse-mailbox") CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe. I disagree that it did not reach consensus. There was never any proper measure of whether it reached consensus. --- On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 1:48 AM Petrit Hasani mailto:phas...@ripe.net>> wrote: Dear colleagues, The policy proposal 2019-04, "Validation of "abuse-mailbox”” has been withdrawn. The proposal aimed to have the RIPE NCC validate "abuse-c:” information more often and introduce a new validation process. The proposal is archived and can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/archived-policy-proposals/archive-policy-proposals/<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ripe.net%2Fparticipate%2Fpolicies%2Farchived-policy-proposals%2Farchive-policy-proposals%2F=02%7C01%7C%7C67078553974541cd0eb208d854a1c354%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637352401030066177=Xcs6Z7sSfR7vagH1CcdO8Cwcki41xW5%2FOTY5%2BYwRep4%3D=0> Reason for withdrawal: The proposal did not reach consensus and the WG chairs did not feel that any further redrafting of the proposal would achieve consensus. Kind regards, -- Petrit Hasani Policy Officer RIPE NCC **
Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Policy Proposal Withdrawn (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
Hi Brian, I’ve already sent you (and the co-chairs and policy officer) my rational for disagreement yesterday. I’m not sure if I need to copy to the list (I will read the PDP for refreshing myself on the appeals process later on today) or how much I should wait for your response before (if needed, hopefully not), starting an appeal. Regards, Jordi @jordipalet El 9/9/20 10:54, "anti-abuse-wg en nombre de Brian Nisbet" escribió: Morning, If you have specific disagreements with the Co-Chairs, then please contact us at aa-wg-ch...@ripe.net with the your reasoning for 2019-04 has reached consensus. The appeals procedure beyond that is detailed in RIPE 710 and I have copied & pasted the specific paragraph here: "If a grievance cannot be resolved with the chair of the WG the matter can be brought to the attention of the Working Group Chairs Collective (WGCC). Anyone may submit an appeal. This must be submitted to the relevant WG mailing list(s) and to the Policy Announce Mailing List (policy-annou...@ripe.net). The appeal will also be published by the RIPE NCC at appropriate locations on the RIPE web site. Any appeal should include a detailed and specific description of the issues and clearly explain why the appeal was submitted. An appeal must be submitted no later than four weeks after the appealable action has occurred. The WGCC will decide by consensus whether to uphold or reject appeals which have been submitted. The decision of the WGCC should be reached no later than four weeks of an appeal being made. Interested parties shall recuse themselves from any discussion or decision within the WGCC relating to the appeal. If the dispute cannot be resolved by the decision of the WGCC, the issue should be brought to the RIPE Chair. The decision of the RIPE Chair will be final." The WGCC can be contacted at wg-cha...@ripe.net However the first step is to contact the WG Chairs for AA-WG with an argument against our decision. Thanks, Brian Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG Brian Nisbet Service Operations Manager HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network 1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland +35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270 From: anti-abuse-wg on behalf of JJS JJS Sent: Wednesday 9 September 2020 02:37 To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Policy Proposal Withdrawn (Validation of "abuse-mailbox") CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe. I disagree that it did not reach consensus. There was never any proper measure of whether it reached consensus. --- On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 1:48 AM Petrit Hasani wrote: Dear colleagues, The policy proposal 2019-04, "Validation of "abuse-mailbox”” has been withdrawn. The proposal aimed to have the RIPE NCC validate "abuse-c:” information more often and introduce a new validation process. The proposal is archived and can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/archived-policy-proposals/archive-policy-proposals/ Reason for withdrawal: The proposal did not reach consensus and the WG chairs did not feel that any further redrafting of the proposal would achieve consensus. 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.
Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Policy Proposal Withdrawn (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
Morning, If you have specific disagreements with the Co-Chairs, then please contact us at aa-wg-ch...@ripe.net with the your reasoning for 2019-04 has reached consensus. The appeals procedure beyond that is detailed in RIPE 710 and I have copied & pasted the specific paragraph here: "If a grievance cannot be resolved with the chair of the WG the matter can be brought to the attention of the Working Group Chairs Collective (WGCC). Anyone may submit an appeal. This must be submitted to the relevant WG mailing list(s) and to the Policy Announce Mailing List (policy-annou...@ripe.net). The appeal will also be published by the RIPE NCC at appropriate locations on the RIPE web site. Any appeal should include a detailed and specific description of the issues and clearly explain why the appeal was submitted. An appeal must be submitted no later than four weeks after the appealable action has occurred. The WGCC will decide by consensus whether to uphold or reject appeals which have been submitted. The decision of the WGCC should be reached no later than four weeks of an appeal being made. Interested parties shall recuse themselves from any discussion or decision within the WGCC relating to the appeal. If the dispute cannot be resolved by the decision of the WGCC, the issue should be brought to the RIPE Chair. The decision of the RIPE Chair will be final." The WGCC can be contacted at wg-cha...@ripe.net However the first step is to contact the WG Chairs for AA-WG with an argument against our decision. Thanks, Brian Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG Brian Nisbet Service Operations Manager HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network 1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland +35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270 From: anti-abuse-wg on behalf of JJS JJS Sent: Wednesday 9 September 2020 02:37 To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Policy Proposal Withdrawn (Validation of "abuse-mailbox") CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe. I disagree that it did not reach consensus. There was never any proper measure of whether it reached consensus. --- On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 1:48 AM Petrit Hasani mailto:phas...@ripe.net>> wrote: Dear colleagues, The policy proposal 2019-04, "Validation of "abuse-mailbox”” has been withdrawn. The proposal aimed to have the RIPE NCC validate "abuse-c:” information more often and introduce a new validation process. The proposal is archived and can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/archived-policy-proposals/archive-policy-proposals/<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ripe.net%2Fparticipate%2Fpolicies%2Farchived-policy-proposals%2Farchive-policy-proposals%2F=02%7C01%7C%7C05cc6e45873d4deb7f1e08d85461084c%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637352123016224328=lhwD6ZY4oQ0amrBhcsHYSKWZgBTkLpC3AwNzg6KhGE0%3D=0> Reason for withdrawal: The proposal did not reach consensus and the WG chairs did not feel that any further redrafting of the proposal would achieve consensus. Kind regards, -- Petrit Hasani Policy Officer RIPE NCC
Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Policy Proposal Withdrawn (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
I disagree that it did not reach consensus. There was never any proper measure of whether it reached consensus. --- On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 1:48 AM Petrit Hasani wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > The policy proposal 2019-04, "Validation of "abuse-mailbox”” has been > withdrawn. > > The proposal aimed to have the RIPE NCC validate "abuse-c:” information > more often and introduce a new validation process. > > The proposal is archived and can be found at: > > https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/archived-policy-proposals/archive-policy-proposals/ > > Reason for withdrawal: > The proposal did not reach consensus and the WG chairs did not feel that > any further redrafting of the proposal would achieve consensus. > > Kind regards, > -- > Petrit Hasani > Policy Officer > RIPE NCC > > > > > >
[anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Policy Proposal Withdrawn (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
Dear colleagues, The policy proposal 2019-04, "Validation of "abuse-mailbox”” has been withdrawn. The proposal aimed to have the RIPE NCC validate "abuse-c:” information more often and introduce a new validation process. The proposal is archived and can be found at: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/archived-policy-proposals/archive-policy-proposals/ Reason for withdrawal: The proposal did not reach consensus and the WG chairs did not feel that any further redrafting of the proposal would achieve consensus. Kind regards, -- Petrit Hasani Policy Officer RIPE NCC signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
