Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

I remember the igf being described as a “talking shop” once.  This wg is on 
much the same lines with the added disadvantage that the topics of discussion 
tend to repeat themselves with monotonous regularity over the decade or more 
that I’ve been on this list as many of you folks have.

Unless the actual issues that keep coming up are identified and suggestions put 
in place to resolve them, I can’t see this rechartering do much more than 
expand the scope of what people gripe about here from spam to ddos, malware c2 
and such, with much the same results as any hope for something actionable 
coming up.


--srs

From: Nick Hilliard 
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2024 2:26:35 PM
To: Serge Droz 
Cc: Michele Neylon - Blacknight ; Suresh 
Ramasubramanian ; anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 

Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse 
Working Group

Serge,

The first step is for the WG to reach some consensus about what it ought to 
recharter to. There's a bunch of topics for a potential new security-wg which 
seem to be broadly acceptable to people on the WG, and another set of 
suggestions relating to telling the RIPE NCC to turn itself into an enforcement 
body, which has never reached consensus over the years.

The question for the WG is whether to move forward with rechartering to what it 
can agree on or - once again - get bogged down on what it can't. This is where 
the problem is.

Nick

Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg wrote on 13/05/2024 17:18:
That's fine. The WG can make suggestions, RIPE NCC considers this, and if 
necessary asks the members, possibly explaining, or asking the WG to explain 
why the change makes sense. Most people are sensible.

I don't see where there is a problem.

Best
Serge

On 13.05.24 16:11, Michele Neylon - Blacknight wrote:
Suresh

It might be helpful to discuss this with them. I’m sure there are **some** 
things that they could do without putting it to the members, but there’s a lot 
of things that would need member agreement in order to change.

Regards

Michele

--

Mr Michele Neylon

Blacknight Solutions

Hosting, Colocation & Domains

https://www.blacknight.com/ 
<https://www.blacknight.com/><https://www.blacknight.com/>

https://blacknight.blog/ <https://blacknight.blog/><https://blacknight.blog/>

Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072

Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090

Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ 
<https://michele.blog/><https://michele.blog/>

Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ <https://ceo.hosting/><https://ceo.hosting/>

---

Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty 
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland  Company No.: 370845

I have sent this email at a time that is convenient for me. I do not expect you 
to respond to it outside of your usual working hours.

*From: *anti-abuse-wg 
<mailto:anti-abuse-wg-boun...@ripe.net> on 
behalf of Suresh Ramasubramanian 
<mailto:ops.li...@gmail.com>
*Date: *Monday, 13 May 2024 at 14:44
*To: *Serge Droz <mailto:serge.d...@first.org>
*Cc: *anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
<mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>
*Subject: *Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse 
Working Group

*[EXTERNAL EMAIL]*Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised 
sources.

RIPE NCC doesn’t really need member input or consensus to change a lot of this. 
Certainly not in tightening or enforcing due diligence procedures rather than 
charging 50 euro an ASN

—srs



*From:*anti-abuse-wg 
<mailto:anti-abuse-wg-boun...@ripe.net> on 
behalf of Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg 
<mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>
*Sent:* Monday, May 13, 2024 7:03:18 PM
*Cc:* anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net<mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net> 
<mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>
*Subject:* Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse 
Working Group

Hi Michele


RIPE currently does not have the power to do a lot of things. The WG cannot 
magically change that.


This is the old merry go round.

Maybe RIPE NCC needs to change certain things, or it will be changed for
them. The WG could provide guidance and suggest possible avenues where
RIPE needs/should change. RIPE can then still ignore that. Believe it or
not: Organizations can change.

So if you say you don't want to discuss this, fine. But don't blame it
RIPE not being able to change.

Best
Serge

--
Dr. Serge Droz
Member, FIRST Board of Directors
https://www.first.org <https://www.first.org><https://www.first.org>

--

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg 
<https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg><https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg>

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Nick Hilliard]

Serge,

The first step is for the WG to reach some consensus about what it ought 
to recharter to. There's a bunch of topics for a potential new 
security-wg which seem to be broadly acceptable to people on the WG, and 
another set of suggestions relating to telling the RIPE NCC to turn 
itself into an enforcement body, which has never reached consensus over 
the years.


The question for the WG is whether to move forward with rechartering to 
what it can agree on or - once again - get bogged down on what it can't. 
This is where the problem is.


Nick

Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg wrote on 13/05/2024 17:18:
That's fine. The WG can make suggestions, RIPE NCC considers this, and 
if necessary asks the members, possibly explaining, or asking the WG 
to explain why the change makes sense. Most people are sensible.


I don't see where there is a problem.

Best
Serge

On 13.05.24 16:11, Michele Neylon - Blacknight wrote:

Suresh

It might be helpful to discuss this with them. I’m sure there are 
**some** things that they could do without putting it to the members, 
but there’s a lot of things that would need member agreement in order 
to change.


Regards

Michele

--

Mr Michele Neylon

Blacknight Solutions

Hosting, Colocation & Domains

https://www.blacknight.com/ <https://www.blacknight.com/>

https://blacknight.blog/ <https://blacknight.blog/>

Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072

Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090

Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ <https://michele.blog/>

Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ <https://ceo.hosting/>

---

Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business 
Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland  Company No.: 
370845


I have sent this email at a time that is convenient for me. I do not 
expect you to respond to it outside of your usual working hours.


*From: *anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of 
Suresh Ramasubramanian 

*Date: *Monday, 13 May 2024 at 14:44
*To: *Serge Droz 
*Cc: *anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
*Subject: *Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the 
Anti-Abuse Working Group


*[EXTERNAL EMAIL]*Please use caution when opening attachments from 
unrecognised sources.


RIPE NCC doesn’t really need member input or consensus to change a 
lot of this. Certainly not in tightening or enforcing due diligence 
procedures rather than charging 50 euro an ASN


—srs



*From:*anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of 
Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg 

*Sent:* Monday, May 13, 2024 7:03:18 PM
*Cc:* anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
*Subject:* Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the 
Anti-Abuse Working Group


Hi Michele


RIPE currently does not have the power to do a lot of things. The WG 
cannot magically change that.



This is the old merry go round.

Maybe RIPE NCC needs to change certain things, or it will be changed for
them. The WG could provide guidance and suggest possible avenues where
RIPE needs/should change. RIPE can then still ignore that. Believe it or
not: Organizations can change.

So if you say you don't want to discuss this, fine. But don't blame it
RIPE not being able to change.

Best
Serge

--
Dr. Serge Droz
Member, FIRST Board of Directors
https://www.first.org <https://www.first.org>

--

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or 
change your subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg 
<https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg>






-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg]

That's fine. The WG can make suggestions, RIPE NCC considers this, and 
if necessary asks the members, possibly explaining, or asking the WG to 
explain why the change makes sense. Most people are sensible.


I don't see where there is a problem.

Best
Serge

On 13.05.24 16:11, Michele Neylon - Blacknight wrote:

Suresh

It might be helpful to discuss this with them. I’m sure there are 
**some** things that they could do without putting it to the members, 
but there’s a lot of things that would need member agreement in order to 
change.


Regards

Michele

--

Mr Michele Neylon

Blacknight Solutions

Hosting, Colocation & Domains

https://www.blacknight.com/ <https://www.blacknight.com/>

https://blacknight.blog/ <https://blacknight.blog/>

Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072

Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090

Personal blog: https://michele.blog/ <https://michele.blog/>

Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/ <https://ceo.hosting/>

---

Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business 
Park,Sleaty Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland  Company No.: 370845


I have sent this email at a time that is convenient for me. I do not 
expect you to respond to it outside of your usual working hours.


*From: *anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of 
Suresh Ramasubramanian 

*Date: *Monday, 13 May 2024 at 14:44
*To: *Serge Droz 
*Cc: *anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
*Subject: *Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the 
Anti-Abuse Working Group


*[EXTERNAL EMAIL]*Please use caution when opening attachments from 
unrecognised sources.


RIPE NCC doesn’t really need member input or consensus to change a lot 
of this. Certainly not in tightening or enforcing due diligence 
procedures rather than charging 50 euro an ASN


—srs



*From:*anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Serge 
Droz via anti-abuse-wg 

*Sent:* Monday, May 13, 2024 7:03:18 PM
*Cc:* anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
*Subject:* Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the 
Anti-Abuse Working Group


Hi Michele


RIPE currently does not have the power to do a lot of things. The WG 
cannot magically change that.



This is the old merry go round.

Maybe RIPE NCC needs to change certain things, or it will be changed for
them. The WG could provide guidance and suggest possible avenues where
RIPE needs/should change. RIPE can then still ignore that. Believe it or
not: Organizations can change.

So if you say you don't want to discuss this, fine. But don't blame it
RIPE not being able to change.

Best
Serge

--
Dr. Serge Droz
Member, FIRST Board of Directors
https://www.first.org <https://www.first.org>

--

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or 
change your subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg 
<https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg>




--
Dr. Serge Droz
Member, FIRST Board of Directors
https://www.first.org

--

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Michele Neylon - Blacknight via anti-abuse-wg]

Suresh

It might be helpful to discuss this with them. I’m sure there are *some* things 
that they could do without putting it to the members, but there’s a lot of 
things that would need member agreement in order to change.

Regards

Michele


--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
https://www.blacknight.com/
https://blacknight.blog/
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
---
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty 
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland  Company No.: 370845

I have sent this email at a time that is convenient for me. I do not expect you 
to respond to it outside of your usual working hours.


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Suresh 
Ramasubramanian 
Date: Monday, 13 May 2024 at 14:44
To: Serge Droz 
Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse 
Working Group

[EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised 
sources.
RIPE NCC doesn’t really need member input or consensus to change a lot of this. 
Certainly not in tightening or enforcing due diligence procedures rather than 
charging 50 euro an ASN


—srs

From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Serge Droz 
via anti-abuse-wg 
Sent: Monday, May 13, 2024 7:03:18 PM
Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse 
Working Group

Hi Michele


> RIPE currently does not have the power to do a lot of things. The WG
> cannot magically change that.


This is the old merry go round.

Maybe RIPE NCC needs to change certain things, or it will be changed for
them. The WG could provide guidance and suggest possible avenues where
RIPE needs/should change. RIPE can then still ignore that. Believe it or
not: Organizations can change.

So if you say you don't want to discuss this, fine. But don't blame it
RIPE not being able to change.

Best
Serge

--
Dr. Serge Droz
Member, FIRST Board of Directors
https://www.first.org

--

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg
-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

RIPE NCC doesn’t really need member input or consensus to change a lot of this. 
Certainly not in tightening or enforcing due diligence procedures rather than 
charging 50 euro an ASN


—srs

From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Serge Droz 
via anti-abuse-wg 
Sent: Monday, May 13, 2024 7:03:18 PM
Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse 
Working Group

Hi Michele


> RIPE currently does not have the power to do a lot of things. The WG
> cannot magically change that.


This is the old merry go round.

Maybe RIPE NCC needs to change certain things, or it will be changed for
them. The WG could provide guidance and suggest possible avenues where
RIPE needs/should change. RIPE can then still ignore that. Believe it or
not: Organizations can change.

So if you say you don't want to discuss this, fine. But don't blame it
RIPE not being able to change.

Best
Serge

--
Dr. Serge Droz
Member, FIRST Board of Directors
https://www.first.org

--

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg
-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg]

Hi Michele


RIPE currently does not have the power to do a lot of things. The WG 
cannot magically change that.



This is the old merry go round.

Maybe RIPE NCC needs to change certain things, or it will be changed for 
them. The WG could provide guidance and suggest possible avenues where 
RIPE needs/should change. RIPE can then still ignore that. Believe it or 
not: Organizations can change.


So if you say you don't want to discuss this, fine. But don't blame it 
RIPE not being able to change.


Best
Serge

--
Dr. Serge Droz
Member, FIRST Board of Directors
https://www.first.org

--

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Michele Neylon - Blacknight via anti-abuse-wg]

Serge

It’s not a matter of “comfort zones” – which Nick explained quite articulately

RIPE currently does not have the power to do a lot of things. The WG cannot 
magically change that.

If you look at the current “debate” raging on the main members’ list, people 
are arguing over a potential 50 euro / year fee for an ASN trying to make out 
that it could potentially bankrupt them….

Getting the same people to agree to giving RIPE NCC more powers over their 
actions would be an uphill struggle!

Regards

Michele

--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
https://www.blacknight.com/
https://blacknight.blog/
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
---
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty 
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland  Company No.: 370845

I have sent this email at a time that is convenient for me. I do not expect you 
to respond to it outside of your usual working hours.


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Serge Droz 
via anti-abuse-wg 
Date: Friday, 10 May 2024 at 13:51
To:
Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse 
Working Group

[EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised 
sources.
Hi Nick

I agree. But what you are saying, is that the WG should continue having no 
tangible effect, because the status quo is more important than getting out of 
one's comfort zone.

Meanwhile others will, in my opinion, push for policy change. And these others 
likely lack crucial insight, i.e. will produce policies that have undesirable 
side effects.

The question was if we want to recharter this WG, so I answered what I felt 
merits the name.

I like the training the WG produced in the past, but I don't remember much else.

If we want to make a concrete contribution to fighting abuse, we may have to 
leave our comfort zone. The internet and the world it lies within has changed 
considerably in the past years. This would suggest we should too.

But I think I made my point by now, and I realise it's not a comfortable one.

Best
Serge

On 10 May 2024 11:57:44 UTC, Nick Hilliard  wrote:
Serge,

there's been extensive debate on AAWG over the years about the principles 
behind your additional suggestions below, but very little consensus. If 
sanctioning is added to the charter of a new security-wg, this lack of 
consensus is likely to continue, and the only outcome will be that the WG will 
be distracted from other productive output. I understand why you might want it 
in there, but punitive action is not within the remit of the RIPE NCC. 
Similarly on point 2, advocacy is important, but requirement / enforcement is 
out of scope for both the RIPE Community and RIPE NCC.

Nick

Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg wrote on 10/05/2024 07:21:


Hi Leo

It's more about sharpening the focus. I colored this red below. I feel 
eventually the RIPE NCC must adapt stronger policies to punish non-action or 
disregard of action. I think it would be better if this WG comes up with such 
policies which the RIPE NCC can then adopt (or not) rather than the RIPE NCC 
having to react to external pressure, e.g. from policy makers, in particular 
the EU. I'm sure one can formulate this much better. I firmly believe, that 
there is no way around stronger regulation, and I'd much rather see this coming 
from this community than form the outside. The regulators i see and work with 
are increasingly irritated and react with totally inadequate demands, which I 
wont reproduce here.
1.   Identifying and analyzing emerging security threats and 
vulnerabilities affecting Internet infrastructure.
2.   Collaborating with stakeholders, in particular the RIPE community, to 
develop and advocate and implement best practices, guidelines, and standards 
for securing Internet resources.
3.   Facilitating information sharing and cooperation among network 
operators, law enforcement, and relevant entities to mitigate security risks.
4.   Providing education, training, and outreach initiatives to raise 
awareness of security issues and promote best practices adoption.
5.   Develop policies recommendations to the RIPE NCC that help enforcing 
good behavior and sanction disregard for faccepted security standards. This 
includes the definition of acceptable minimal standards.
Best regards
Serge

On 09.05.24 21:39, Leo Vegoda wrote:

Hi Serge,



On Thu, 9 May 2024 at 11:41, Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg

<mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net> wrote:

Hi Leo



We can only recommend the community, obviously.

I agree.



So these aare the best

practices



We can recommend that RIPE NCC changes its rules and procedures to

address certain issues.



As a WG, if I'm correct we have no other power.

Based on thisl, I don't understand what's missing from the 

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Alessandro Vesely]

On Fri 10/May/2024 13:57:44 +0200 Nick Hilliard wrote:

Serge,

there's been extensive debate on AAWG over the years about the principles 
behind your additional suggestions below, but very little consensus. If 
sanctioning is added to the charter of a new security-wg, this lack of 
consensus is likely to continue, and the only outcome will be that the WG will 
be distracted from other productive output.



Sanctioning has various meanings, from penalties and coercive measures to 
hinder or discouragement.  Before putting that into the charter we should 
discuss and reach consensus about what meaning we exactly mean, which includes 
clarifying what leeway is the RIPE NCC allowed.  At a minimum, listing proven 
bad actors must be possible.



I understand why you might want it in there, but punitive action is not 
within the remit of the RIPE NCC. Similarly on point 2, advocacy is 
important, but requirement / enforcement is out of scope for both the RIPE 
Community and RIPE NCC.



Implementing solutions and utilities is certainly in scope.


Best
Ale



Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg wrote on 10/05/2024 07:21:


Hi Leo

It's more about sharpening the focus. I colored this red below. I feel 
eventually the RIPE NCC must adapt stronger policies to punish non-action or 
disregard of action. I think it would be better if this WG comes up with such 
policies which the RIPE NCC can then adopt (or not) rather than the RIPE NCC 
having to react to external pressure, e.g. from policy makers, in particular 
the EU. I'm sure one can formulate this much better. I firmly believe, that 
there is no way around stronger regulation, and I'd much rather see this 
coming from this community than form the outside. The regulators i see and 
work with are increasingly irritated and react with totally inadequate 
demands, which I wont reproduce here.


 1. Identifying and analyzing emerging security threats and vulnerabilities
affecting Internet infrastructure.
 2. Collaborating with stakeholders, in particular the RIPE community, to
develop and advocate and implement best practices, guidelines, and
standards for securing Internet resources.
 3. Facilitating information sharing and cooperation among network operators,
law enforcement, and relevant entities to mitigate security risks.
 4. Providing education, training, and outreach initiatives to raise
awareness of security issues and promote best practices adoption.
 5. Develop policies recommendations to the RIPE NCC that help enforcing good
behavior and sanction disregard for faccepted security standards. This
includes the definition of acceptable minimal standards.

Best regards
Serge



--

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg]

Hi Nick

I agree. But what you are saying, is that the WG should continue having no 
tangible effect, because the status quo is more important than getting out of 
one's comfort zone. 

Meanwhile others will, in my opinion, push for policy change. And these others 
likely lack crucial insight, i.e. will produce policies that have undesirable 
side effects. 

The question was if we want to recharter this WG, so I answered what I felt 
merits the name. 

I like the training the WG produced in the past, but I don't remember much else.

If we want to make a concrete contribution to fighting abuse, we may have to 
leave our comfort zone. The internet and the world it lies within has changed 
considerably in the past years. This would suggest we should too. 

But I think I made my point by now, and I realise it's not a comfortable one. 

Best 
Serge

On 10 May 2024 11:57:44 UTC, Nick Hilliard  wrote:
>Serge,
>
>there's been extensive debate on AAWG over the years about the principles 
>behind your additional suggestions below, but very little consensus. If 
>sanctioning is added to the charter of a new security-wg, this lack of 
>consensus is likely to continue, and the only outcome will be that the WG will 
>be distracted from other productive output. I understand why you might want it 
>in there, but punitive action is not within the remit of the RIPE NCC. 
>Similarly on point 2, advocacy is important, but requirement / enforcement is 
>out of scope for both the RIPE Community and RIPE NCC.
>
>Nick
>
>Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg wrote on 10/05/2024 07:21:
>> 
>> Hi Leo
>> 
>> It's more about sharpening the focus. I colored this red below. I feel 
>> eventually the RIPE NCC must adapt stronger policies to punish non-action or 
>> disregard of action. I think it would be better if this WG comes up with 
>> such policies which the RIPE NCC can then adopt (or not) rather than the 
>> RIPE NCC having to react to external pressure, e.g. from policy makers, in 
>> particular the EU. I'm sure one can formulate this much better. I firmly 
>> believe, that there is no way around stronger regulation, and I'd much 
>> rather see this coming from this community than form the outside. The 
>> regulators i see and work with are increasingly irritated and react with 
>> totally inadequate demands, which I wont reproduce here.
>> 
>>  1. Identifying and analyzing emerging security threats and
>> vulnerabilities affecting Internet infrastructure.
>>  2. Collaborating with stakeholders, in particular the RIPE community,
>> to develop and advocate and implement best practices, guidelines,
>> and standards for securing Internet resources.
>>  3. Facilitating information sharing and cooperation among network
>> operators, law enforcement, and relevant entities to mitigate
>> security risks.
>>  4. Providing education, training, and outreach initiatives to raise
>> awareness of security issues and promote best practices adoption.
>>  5. Develop policies recommendations to the RIPE NCC that help
>> enforcing good behavior and sanction disregard for faccepted
>> security standards. This includes the definition of acceptable
>> minimal standards.
>> 
>> Best regards
>> Serge
>> 
>> On 09.05.24 21:39, Leo Vegoda wrote:
>>> Hi Serge,
>>> 
>>> On Thu, 9 May 2024 at 11:41, Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg
>>>   wrote:
 Hi Leo
 
 We can only recommend the community, obviously.
>>> I agree.
>>> 
 So these aare the best
 practices
 
 We can recommend that RIPE NCC changes its rules and procedures to
 address certain issues.
 
 As a WG, if I'm correct we have no other power.
>>> Based on thisl, I don't understand what's missing from the draft text.
>>> Maybe you could suggest some specific edits?
>>> 
>>> Kind regards,
>>> 
>>> Leo
>> -- 
>> Dr. Serge Droz
>> Member, FIRST Board of Directors
>> https://www.first.org
>> 
>> 
>

--
Dr. Serge Droz
Director, Forum of Incident Response and Security Teams
https://first.org-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

Of course. Without serge’s point 5 though,  I doubt whether the rechartering 
will have very much use or effect.

--srs

From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Nick Hilliard 

Sent: Friday, May 10, 2024 5:27:44 PM
To: Serge Droz 
Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse 
Working Group

Serge,

there's been extensive debate on AAWG over the years about the principles 
behind your additional suggestions below, but very little consensus. If 
sanctioning is added to the charter of a new security-wg, this lack of 
consensus is likely to continue, and the only outcome will be that the WG will 
be distracted from other productive output. I understand why you might want it 
in there, but punitive action is not within the remit of the RIPE NCC. 
Similarly on point 2, advocacy is important, but requirement / enforcement is 
out of scope for both the RIPE Community and RIPE NCC.

Nick

Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg wrote on 10/05/2024 07:21:

Hi Leo

It's more about sharpening the focus. I colored this red below. I feel 
eventually the RIPE NCC must adapt stronger policies to punish non-action or 
disregard of action. I think it would be better if this WG comes up with such 
policies which the RIPE NCC can then adopt (or not) rather than the RIPE NCC 
having to react to external pressure, e.g. from policy makers, in particular 
the EU. I'm sure one can formulate this much better. I firmly believe, that 
there is no way around stronger regulation, and I'd much rather see this coming 
from this community than form the outside. The regulators i see and work with 
are increasingly irritated and react with totally inadequate demands, which I 
wont reproduce here.

  1.  Identifying and analyzing emerging security threats and vulnerabilities 
affecting Internet infrastructure.
  2.  Collaborating with stakeholders, in particular the RIPE community, to 
develop and advocate and implement best practices, guidelines, and standards 
for securing Internet resources.
  3.  Facilitating information sharing and cooperation among network operators, 
law enforcement, and relevant entities to mitigate security risks.
  4.  Providing education, training, and outreach initiatives to raise 
awareness of security issues and promote best practices adoption.
  5.  Develop policies recommendations to the RIPE NCC that help enforcing good 
behavior and sanction disregard for faccepted security standards. This includes 
the definition of acceptable minimal standards.

Best regards
Serge

On 09.05.24 21:39, Leo Vegoda wrote:

Hi Serge,

On Thu, 9 May 2024 at 11:41, Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg
<mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net> wrote:


Hi Leo

We can only recommend the community, obviously.


I agree.



So these aare the best
practices

We can recommend that RIPE NCC changes its rules and procedures to
address certain issues.

As a WG, if I'm correct we have no other power.


Based on thisl, I don't understand what's missing from the draft text.
Maybe you could suggest some specific edits?

Kind regards,

Leo


--
Dr. Serge Droz
Member, FIRST Board of Directors
https://www.first.org



-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Nick Hilliard]

Serge,

there's been extensive debate on AAWG over the years about the 
principles behind your additional suggestions below, but very little 
consensus. If sanctioning is added to the charter of a new security-wg, 
this lack of consensus is likely to continue, and the only outcome will 
be that the WG will be distracted from other productive output. I 
understand why you might want it in there, but punitive action is not 
within the remit of the RIPE NCC. Similarly on point 2, advocacy is 
important, but requirement / enforcement is out of scope for both the 
RIPE Community and RIPE NCC.


Nick

Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg wrote on 10/05/2024 07:21:


Hi Leo

It's more about sharpening the focus. I colored this red below. I feel 
eventually the RIPE NCC must adapt stronger policies to punish 
non-action or disregard of action. I think it would be better if this 
WG comes up with such policies which the RIPE NCC can then adopt (or 
not) rather than the RIPE NCC having to react to external pressure, 
e.g. from policy makers, in particular the EU. I'm sure one can 
formulate this much better. I firmly believe, that there is no way 
around stronger regulation, and I'd much rather see this coming from 
this community than form the outside. The regulators i see and work 
with are increasingly irritated and react with totally inadequate 
demands, which I wont reproduce here.


 1. Identifying and analyzing emerging security threats and
vulnerabilities affecting Internet infrastructure.
 2. Collaborating with stakeholders, in particular the RIPE community,
to develop and advocate and implement best practices, guidelines,
and standards for securing Internet resources.
 3. Facilitating information sharing and cooperation among network
operators, law enforcement, and relevant entities to mitigate
security risks.
 4. Providing education, training, and outreach initiatives to raise
awareness of security issues and promote best practices adoption.
 5. Develop policies recommendations to the RIPE NCC that help
enforcing good behavior and sanction disregard for faccepted
security standards. This includes the definition of acceptable
minimal standards.

Best regards
Serge

On 09.05.24 21:39, Leo Vegoda wrote:

Hi Serge,

On Thu, 9 May 2024 at 11:41, Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg
  wrote:

Hi Leo

We can only recommend the community, obviously.

I agree.


So these aare the best
practices

We can recommend that RIPE NCC changes its rules and procedures to
address certain issues.

As a WG, if I'm correct we have no other power.

Based on thisl, I don't understand what's missing from the draft text.
Maybe you could suggest some specific edits?

Kind regards,

Leo

--
Dr. Serge Droz
Member, FIRST Board of Directors
https://www.first.org




-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

And includes much more due diligence in IP allocation and membership 
procedures, hopefully


--srs

From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Serge Droz 
via anti-abuse-wg 
Sent: Friday, May 10, 2024 11:51:13 AM
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse 
Working Group


Hi Leo

It's more about sharpening the focus. I colored this red below. I feel 
eventually the RIPE NCC must adapt stronger policies to punish non-action or 
disregard of action. I think it would be better if this WG comes up with such 
policies which the RIPE NCC can then adopt (or not) rather than the RIPE NCC 
having to react to external pressure, e.g. from policy makers, in particular 
the EU. I'm sure one can formulate this much better. I firmly believe, that 
there is no way around stronger regulation, and I'd much rather see this coming 
from this community than form the outside. The regulators i see and work with 
are increasingly irritated and react with totally inadequate demands, which I 
wont reproduce here.

  1.  Identifying and analyzing emerging security threats and vulnerabilities 
affecting Internet infrastructure.
  2.  Collaborating with stakeholders, in particular the RIPE community, to 
develop and advocate and implement best practices, guidelines, and standards 
for securing Internet resources.
  3.  Facilitating information sharing and cooperation among network operators, 
law enforcement, and relevant entities to mitigate security risks.
  4.  Providing education, training, and outreach initiatives to raise 
awareness of security issues and promote best practices adoption.
  5.  Develop policies recommendations to the RIPE NCC that help enforcing good 
behavior and sanction disregard for faccepted security standards. This includes 
the definition of acceptable minimal standards.

Best regards
Serge

On 09.05.24 21:39, Leo Vegoda wrote:

Hi Serge,

On Thu, 9 May 2024 at 11:41, Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg
<mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net> wrote:



Hi Leo

We can only recommend the community, obviously.



I agree.



So these aare the best
practices

We can recommend that RIPE NCC changes its rules and procedures to
address certain issues.

As a WG, if I'm correct we have no other power.



Based on thisl, I don't understand what's missing from the draft text.
Maybe you could suggest some specific edits?

Kind regards,

Leo


--
Dr. Serge Droz
Member, FIRST Board of Directors
https://www.first.org
-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg]

Hi Leo

It's more about sharpening the focus. I colored this red below. I feel 
eventually the RIPE NCC must adapt stronger policies to punish 
non-action or disregard of action. I think it would be better if this WG 
comes up with such policies which the RIPE NCC can then adopt (or not) 
rather than the RIPE NCC having to react to external pressure, e.g. from 
policy makers, in particular the EU. I'm sure one can formulate this 
much better. I firmly believe, that there is no way around stronger 
regulation, and I'd much rather see this coming from this community than 
form the outside. The regulators i see and work with are increasingly 
irritated and react with totally inadequate demands, which I wont 
reproduce here.


1. Identifying and analyzing emerging security threats and
   vulnerabilities affecting Internet infrastructure.
2. Collaborating with stakeholders, in particular the RIPE community,
   to develop and advocate and implement best practices, guidelines,
   and standards for securing Internet resources.
3. Facilitating information sharing and cooperation among network
   operators, law enforcement, and relevant entities to mitigate
   security risks.
4. Providing education, training, and outreach initiatives to raise
   awareness of security issues and promote best practices adoption.
5. Develop policies recommendations to the RIPE NCC that help enforcing
   good behavior and sanction disregard for faccepted security
   standards. This includes the definition of acceptable minimal
   standards.

Best regards
Serge

On 09.05.24 21:39, Leo Vegoda wrote:

Hi Serge,

On Thu, 9 May 2024 at 11:41, Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg
  wrote:

Hi Leo

We can only recommend the community, obviously.

I agree.


So these aare the best
practices

We can recommend that RIPE NCC changes its rules and procedures to
address certain issues.

As a WG, if I'm correct we have no other power.

Based on thisl, I don't understand what's missing from the draft text.
Maybe you could suggest some specific edits?

Kind regards,

Leo


--
Dr. Serge Droz
Member, FIRST Board of Directors
https://www.first.org
-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Leo Vegoda]

Hi Serge,

On Thu, 9 May 2024 at 11:41, Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg
 wrote:
>
> Hi Leo
>
> We can only recommend the community, obviously.

I agree.

> So these aare the best
> practices
>
> We can recommend that RIPE NCC changes its rules and procedures to
> address certain issues.
>
> As a WG, if I'm correct we have no other power.

Based on thisl, I don't understand what's missing from the draft text.
Maybe you could suggest some specific edits?

Kind regards,

Leo

-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg]

Hi Leo

We can only recommend the community, obviously. So these aare the best 
practices


We can recommend that RIPE NCC changes its rules and procedures to 
address certain issues.


As a WG, if I'm correct we have no other power.

Best
Serge

On 09.05.24 20:15, Leo Vegoda wrote:

Serge,

On Thu, 9 May 2024 at 10:23, Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg
 wrote:


Dear Markus

Thanks for this list. I'd love to see a bit more than best practices
though. I'd like to see this group come up with recommendations of what
RIPE can/should do to curb malicious behavior.


Are you referring to RIPE as a community or to the RIPE NCC as a legal entity?

Kind regards,

Leo


--
Dr. Serge Droz
Member, FIRST Board of Directors
https://www.first.org

--

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Leo Vegoda]

Serge,

On Thu, 9 May 2024 at 10:23, Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg
 wrote:
>
> Dear Markus
>
> Thanks for this list. I'd love to see a bit more than best practices
> though. I'd like to see this group come up with recommendations of what
> RIPE can/should do to curb malicious behavior.

Are you referring to RIPE as a community or to the RIPE NCC as a legal entity?

Kind regards,

Leo

-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg]

Dear Markus

Thanks for this list. I'd love to see a bit more than best practices 
though. I'd like to see this group come up with recommendations of what 
RIPE can/should do to curb malicious behavior.


I think there are already a lot of groups that share info, so I'm not 
sure we need another one, but if members have a need for that, we could 
liaise with such existing groups. Shadowserver and FIRST come to mind. 
But again, people that want to do things probably already have this inf. 
We should figure out what to do with people who don't care.


Best
Serge



On 07.05.24 13:59, mar...@mxdomain.de wrote:

Dear Anti-Abuse Working Group Members,

Thank you for your responses and support for both the WG itself and the 
current Co-Chairs. We are pleased to see that you prefer to keep this WG 
active.


As Co-Chairs, we see an opportunity to broaden our scope (i.e., 
re-charter). Our main intention is to bring in fresh energy and 
perspectives by welcoming new faces. Additionally, there are relevant 
security topics that don't always neatly fit into other WGs.


Regarding the question of what a new charter might entail, we have put 
together a preliminary, high level, draft that we would love to discuss 
further at RIPE88.


— snip —
Objective:
The Security Working Group is committed to fostering collaboration, 
sharing best practices, and addressing security challenges within the 
RIPE community. The primary objective of the WG is to enhance the 
security, resilience, and stability of the Internet infrastructure 
within our region. Tackling abuse of Internet infrastructure and 
resources would remain a goal of the WG.


Scope:
- Identifying and analyzing emerging security threats and 
vulnerabilities affecting Internet infrastructure.
- Collaborating with stakeholders to develop and advocate for best 
practices, guidelines, and standards for securing Internet resources.
- Facilitating information sharing and cooperation among network 
operators, law enforcement, and relevant entities to mitigate security 
risks.
- Providing education, training, and outreach initiatives to raise 
awareness of security issues and promote best practices adoption.
- Develop policies and best practices to improve security and response 
to security incidents and abuse issues.

— snap —

We are looking forward to your input and comments.

Best regards,
Brian, Tobias, Markus



--
Dr. Serge Droz
Member, FIRST Board of Directors
https://www.first.org

--

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Nick Hilliard]

I'm in favour of a re-charter along these grounds.  There is an appetite 
for the wider issue of security, and a place that a RIPE working group 
could fill. The scope below looks reasonable for re-chartering the 
anti-abuse working group.


Nick

mar...@mxdomain.de wrote on 07/05/2024 12:59:

Dear Anti-Abuse Working Group Members,

Thank you for your responses and support for both the WG itself and 
the current Co-Chairs. We are pleased to see that you prefer to keep 
this WG active.


As Co-Chairs, we see an opportunity to broaden our scope (i.e., 
re-charter). Our main intention is to bring in fresh energy and 
perspectives by welcoming new faces. Additionally, there are relevant 
security topics that don't always neatly fit into other WGs.


Regarding the question of what a new charter might entail, we have put 
together a preliminary, high level, draft that we would love to 
discuss further at RIPE88.


— snip —
Objective:
The Security Working Group is committed to fostering collaboration, 
sharing best practices, and addressing security challenges within the 
RIPE community. The primary objective of the WG is to enhance the 
security, resilience, and stability of the Internet infrastructure 
within our region. Tackling abuse of Internet infrastructure and 
resources would remain a goal of the WG.


Scope:
- Identifying and analyzing emerging security threats and 
vulnerabilities affecting Internet infrastructure.
- Collaborating with stakeholders to develop and advocate for best 
practices, guidelines, and standards for securing Internet resources.
- Facilitating information sharing and cooperation among network 
operators, law enforcement, and relevant entities to mitigate security 
risks.
- Providing education, training, and outreach initiatives to raise 
awareness of security issues and promote best practices adoption.
- Develop policies and best practices to improve security and response 
to security incidents and abuse issues.

— snap —

We are looking forward to your input and comments.

Best regards,
Brian, Tobias, Markus



-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

[anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[markus]

Dear Anti-Abuse Working Group Members,

Thank you for your responses and support for both the WG itself and the 
current Co-Chairs. We are pleased to see that you prefer to keep this WG 
active.


As Co-Chairs, we see an opportunity to broaden our scope (i.e., 
re-charter). Our main intention is to bring in fresh energy and 
perspectives by welcoming new faces. Additionally, there are relevant 
security topics that don't always neatly fit into other WGs.


Regarding the question of what a new charter might entail, we have put 
together a preliminary, high level, draft that we would love to discuss 
further at RIPE88.


— snip —
Objective:
The Security Working Group is committed to fostering collaboration, 
sharing best practices, and addressing security challenges within the 
RIPE community. The primary objective of the WG is to enhance the 
security, resilience, and stability of the Internet infrastructure 
within our region. Tackling abuse of Internet infrastructure and 
resources would remain a goal of the WG.


Scope:
- Identifying and analyzing emerging security threats and 
vulnerabilities affecting Internet infrastructure.
- Collaborating with stakeholders to develop and advocate for best 
practices, guidelines, and standards for securing Internet resources.
- Facilitating information sharing and cooperation among network 
operators, law enforcement, and relevant entities to mitigate security 
risks.
- Providing education, training, and outreach initiatives to raise 
awareness of security issues and promote best practices adoption.
- Develop policies and best practices to improve security and response 
to security incidents and abuse issues.

— snap —

We are looking forward to your input and comments.

Best regards,
Brian, Tobias, Markus

--

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Chris Buckridge]

A hearty +1 to the points that Wolfgang makes!

Chris

On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 11:35 AM Wolfgang Tremmel via anti-abuse-wg <
anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net> wrote:

> re-chartering and widen the the scope is IMHO a good idea, although the
> current charter allows also non-email abuse to be in scope of the WG. This
> might include a renaming (Network Security WG? Internet Security WG?)
>
> please do not close the WG! also: I am happy with the current chairs.
>
> best regards
> Wolfgang
>
>
> > On 3. Apr 2024, at 11:27, Brian Nisbet  wrote:
> >
> > In the meantime, if anyone else has any input, we would love to hear it,
> especially from those who don't engage very often with the WG!
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Wolfgang Tremmel
>
> Phone +49 69 1730902 0  | wolfgang.trem...@de-cix.net
> Executive Directors: Ivaylo Ivanov and Sebastian Seifert | Trade Registry:
> AG Cologne, HRB 51135
> DE-CIX Management GmbH | Lindleystrasse 12 | 60314 Frankfurt am Main |
> Germany | www.de-cix.net
>
>
> --
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change
> your subscription options, please visit:
> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg
>
-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Wolfgang Tremmel via anti-abuse-wg]

re-chartering and widen the the scope is IMHO a good idea, although the current 
charter allows also non-email abuse to be in scope of the WG. This might 
include a renaming (Network Security WG? Internet Security WG?)

please do not close the WG! also: I am happy with the current chairs.

best regards
Wolfgang


> On 3. Apr 2024, at 11:27, Brian Nisbet  wrote:
> 
> In the meantime, if anyone else has any input, we would love to hear it, 
> especially from those who don't engage very often with the WG!
> 



-- 
Wolfgang Tremmel 

Phone +49 69 1730902 0  | wolfgang.trem...@de-cix.net
Executive Directors: Ivaylo Ivanov and Sebastian Seifert | Trade Registry: AG 
Cologne, HRB 51135
DE-CIX Management GmbH | Lindleystrasse 12 | 60314 Frankfurt am Main | Germany 
| www.de-cix.net


-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Brian Nisbet]

Thanks for the feedback so far, everyone, the Co-Chairs are taking it all on 
board!

In the meantime, if anyone else has any input, we would love to hear it, 
especially from those who don't engage very often with the WG!

Thank you,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet (he/him)
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
North Dock Two, 93-94 North Wall Quay, Dublin 1, D01 V8Y6
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Michele 
Neylon - Blacknight via anti-abuse-wg 
Sent: Monday 25 March 2024 17:26
To: Markus de Brün ; anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 

Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse 
Working Group


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.


Markus



There should be a simple “continue as now” option, though I do appreciate that 
opening a discussion on the WG’s future could be useful



Expanding the group’s scope – okay, but to what? And to what end?



Regards



Michele



--

Mr Michele Neylon

Blacknight Solutions

Hosting, Colocation & Domains

https://www.blacknight.com/

https://blacknight.blog/

Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072

Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090

Personal blog: https://michele.blog/

Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/

---

Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty 
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland  Company No.: 370845



I have sent this email at a time that is convenient for me. I do not expect you 
to respond to it outside of your usual working hours.


-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Michele Neylon - Blacknight via anti-abuse-wg]

Markus

There should be a simple “continue as now” option, though I do appreciate that 
opening a discussion on the WG’s future could be useful

Expanding the group’s scope – okay, but to what? And to what end?

Regards

Michele

--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
https://www.blacknight.com/
https://blacknight.blog/
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
---
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty 
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland  Company No.: 370845

I have sent this email at a time that is convenient for me. I do not expect you 
to respond to it outside of your usual working hours.

-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Nick Hilliard]

I don't have an issue expanding the scope of the WG by e.g. rechartering 
as security wg. This would be probably be useful.


In relation to lack of progress on WG policy items and repeated circular 
discussions, most of the these centered on one of two things 1. 
perceived lack of viability of some of the operational proposals and 2. 
using policies to mandate the RIPE NCC to enforce specific behaviour on 
the part of number resource registrants. Rather than spending more 
effort on things that we can't agree on, it might be better to focus on 
things that we can, or at least have a chance of agreeing on? For 
example common standards for security, operational recommendations, etc.


Nick


Markus de Brün 
21 March 2024 at 09:09
*

Dear Anti-Abuse Working Group Members,


As Co-Chairs, we have been carefully monitoring the discussions on the 
mailing list and are concerned about the current state of stagnation 
and lack of progress.


After consideration and discussion among the Co-Chairs, we believe it 
is necessary to initiate a dialogue regarding the future direction of 
our working group. Some action is needed to revitalise our efforts.



The Co-Chairs have discussed a number of options, both between 
ourselves and with the RIPE Chair Team. However, due to the lack of 
general engagement, and the circular conversations on the list, we see 
three viable options at this point::



1.

Re-charteringthe working group, possibly transitioning it into a
Security Working Group to broaden our scope and address related
concerns comprehensively. (The current charter can be found here:
https://www.ripe.net/community/wg/active-wg/anti-abuse/)

2.

It is possible we are simply the wrong Co-Chairs at the wrong
time, so we can step-downand allow the working group to select new
Co-Chairs.

3.

Closing the working groupif consensus cannot be reached on a
viable path forward.


It may be that there are people in the Working Group who are eager to 
propose new policies, or embark on a project to systematically examine 
the abuse ecosystem, but over the last year or so, there has been no 
evidence this is the case.



However, we firmly believe that the best course of action is to engage 
all members of the Anti-Abuse Working Group in an open and transparent 
discussion about the challenges we face and the opportunities for 
positive change. Your input and perspectives are invaluable in shaping 
the future of our community.



Therefore, we are inviting you to participate actively in this crucial 
conversation. We encourage you to share your thoughts, suggestions, 
and concerns regarding the current state of the working group and your 
vision for its future direction.



Your input will help inform our next steps and guide the evolution of 
the Anti-Abuse Working Group. We encourage you to share your feedback 
openly on the mailing list so that all members can participate in the 
conversation. We hope to discuss the status at RIPE88.



Thank you for reading this far. We look forward to your active 
participation in shaping the future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group.



Best regards,

Brian, Tobias, Markus

*




-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Alex de Joode]

Chairs,
Thanks for opening the discussion. 
The fact the mailing list is currently relatively dormant is not necessarily a 
bad thing thing(tm). 
There is certainly value in keeping this working group, as one of the main 
issues that will pop-up end of 2024/2025 will be the future revision of the DSA 
with regards to 'streaming live piracy' (think of F1, Football, Olympics etc). 
The rights holders do want RIPE to do more, so there will be a need for a 
central venue to discuss this.
Also abuse will forever be part of our wonderful ecosystem, so let's at least 
have/keep a proper venue to discuss this when the need arrises.
As for the option below I miss "keep as is" :), also what issue(s) are now not 
covered and would be need a home @ a expanded 'security group' ?
​-- IDGARA | Alex de Joode | a...@idgara.nl | +31651108221 


On Thu, 21-03-2024 10h 11min, Markus de Brün  wrote:
> 

  Dear Anti-Abuse Working Group Members,

  
> 
  As Co-Chairs, we have been carefully monitoring the discussions on the 
mailing list and are concerned about the current state of stagnation and lack 
of progress.
After consideration and discussion among the Co-Chairs, we believe it is 
necessary to initiate a dialogue regarding the future direction of our working 
group. Some action is needed to revitalise our efforts.

  
> 
  The Co-Chairs have discussed a number of options, both between ourselves 
and with the RIPE Chair Team. However, due to the lack of general engagement, 
and the circular conversations on the list, we see three viable options at this 
point::

  
> 
  

 * Re-chartering the working group, possibly transitioning it into a Security 
Working Group to broaden our scope and address related concerns 
comprehensively. (The current charter can be found here: 
https://www.ripe.net/community/wg/active-wg/anti-abuse/)


 * It is possible we are simply the wrong Co-Chairs at the wrong time, so we 
can step-down and allow the working group to select new Co-Chairs.


 * Closing the working group if consensus cannot be reached on a viable path 
forward.

  
  
> 
  It may be that there are people in the Working Group who are eager to 
propose new policies, or embark on a project to systematically examine the 
abuse ecosystem, but over the last year or so, there has been no evidence this 
is the case.

  
> 
  However, we firmly believe that the best course of action is to engage 
all members of the Anti-Abuse Working Group in an open and transparent 
discussion about the challenges we face and the opportunities for positive 
change. Your input and perspectives are invaluable in shaping the future of our 
community.

  
> 
  Therefore, we are inviting you to participate actively in this crucial 
conversation. We encourage you to share your thoughts, suggestions, and 
concerns regarding the current state of the working group and your vision for 
its future direction.

  
> 
  Your input will help inform our next steps and guide the evolution of the 
Anti-Abuse Working Group. We encourage you to share your feedback openly on the 
mailing list so that all members can participate in the conversation. We hope 
to discuss the status at RIPE88.

  
> 
  Thank you for reading this far. We look forward to your active 
participation in shaping the future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group.

  
> 
  Best regards,
Brian, Tobias, Markus


> 
  


--
> 
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change 
> your subscription options, please visit: 
> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg
> 



-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Klaus-Peter Kossakowski]

+1

Best
Peter

Am 24.03.24 um 01:52 schrieb Carlos Friaças via anti-abuse-wg:


Hi everyone,

My 2 cents:

I'm clearly for option 1.

Cheers,
Carlos


On Thu, 21 Mar 2024, Alessandro Vesely wrote:


Hi chairs, all,

I think this is a great working group.  Periods of silence are 
physiological; for example, they may arise after a thorough discussion 
about a proposed point which is eventually found to be unfeasible.  
The idea to force every abuse-c to actually receive email messages and 
act on them suits that example.


If there are security topics that the current charter doesn't cover, 
re-chartering is certainly a good idea.  The chairs are great, 
especially Brian, and I see no reason to select new ones.  Closing the 
working group would be a matter of regret and I hope it's not going to 
happen.



Best
Ale


On Thu 21/Mar/2024 10:09:00 +0100 Markus de Brün wrote:


Dear Anti-Abuse Working Group Members,


As Co-Chairs, we have been carefully monitoring the discussions on 
the mailing list and are concerned about the current state of 
stagnation and lack of progress.


After consideration and discussion among the Co-Chairs, we believe it 
is necessary to initiate a dialogue regarding the future direction of 
our working group. Some action is needed to revitalise our efforts.



The Co-Chairs have discussed a number of options, both between 
ourselves and with the RIPE Chair Team. However, due to the lack of 
general engagement, and the circular conversations on the list, we 
see three viable options at this point::



 1.

    Re-charteringthe working group, possibly transitioning it into a 
Security

    Working Group to broaden our scope and address related concerns
    comprehensively. (The current charter can be found here:
    https://www.ripe.net/community/wg/active-wg/anti-abuse/
    )

 2.

    It is possible we are simply the wrong Co-Chairs at the wrong 
time, so we

    can step-downand allow the working group to select new Co-Chairs.

 3.

    Closing the working groupif consensus cannot be reached on a 
viable path

    forward.


It may be that there are people in the Working Group who are eager to 
propose new policies, or embark on a project to systematically 
examine the abuse ecosystem, but over the last year or so, there has 
been no evidence this is the case.



However, we firmly believe that the best course of action is to 
engage all members of the Anti-Abuse Working Group in an open and 
transparent discussion about the challenges we face and the 
opportunities for positive change. Your input and perspectives are 
invaluable in shaping the future of our community.



Therefore, we are inviting you to participate actively in this 
crucial conversation. We encourage you to share your thoughts, 
suggestions, and concerns regarding the current state of the working 
group and your vision for its future direction.



Your input will help inform our next steps and guide the evolution of 
the Anti-Abuse Working Group. We encourage you to share your feedback 
openly on the mailing list so that all members can participate in the 
conversation. We hope to discuss the status at RIPE88.



Thank you for reading this far. We look forward to your active 
participation in shaping the future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group.



Best regards,

Brian, Tobias, Markus





--

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or 
change your subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg






--
Dr. Klaus-Peter Kossakowski k...@pre-secure.de
Managing Director  Phone (+49) 0171 / 5767010

PRESECURE Consulting GmbH USt-IdNr.: DE 209907166
Sitz/Register: HamburgAG Hamburg, HRB 133 548


OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

There really isn’t much possible regardless of the rechartering.

There is one section of wg members opposed to taking action of almost any sort 
that is proposed by members of another section of the wg members.

Tinkering with who the chairs are or what the charter is will not have any 
effect on this, you need a professional negotiation or conflict resolution 
person.

--srs

From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Carlos 
Friaças via anti-abuse-wg 
Date: Sunday, 24 March 2024 at 6:22 AM
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse 
Working Group

Hi everyone,

My 2 cents:

I'm clearly for option 1.

Cheers,
Carlos


On Thu, 21 Mar 2024, Alessandro Vesely wrote:

> Hi chairs, all,
>
> I think this is a great working group.  Periods of silence are physiological;
> for example, they may arise after a thorough discussion about a proposed
> point which is eventually found to be unfeasible.  The idea to force every
> abuse-c to actually receive email messages and act on them suits that
> example.
>
> If there are security topics that the current charter doesn't cover,
> re-chartering is certainly a good idea.  The chairs are great, especially
> Brian, and I see no reason to select new ones.  Closing the working group
> would be a matter of regret and I hope it's not going to happen.
>
>
> Best
> Ale
>
>
> On Thu 21/Mar/2024 10:09:00 +0100 Markus de Brün wrote:
>>
>> Dear Anti-Abuse Working Group Members,
>>
>>
>> As Co-Chairs, we have been carefully monitoring the discussions on the
>> mailing list and are concerned about the current state of stagnation and
>> lack of progress.
>>
>> After consideration and discussion among the Co-Chairs, we believe it is
>> necessary to initiate a dialogue regarding the future direction of our
>> working group. Some action is needed to revitalise our efforts.
>>
>>
>> The Co-Chairs have discussed a number of options, both between ourselves
>> and with the RIPE Chair Team. However, due to the lack of general
>> engagement, and the circular conversations on the list, we see three viable
>> options at this point::
>>
>>
>>  1.
>>
>> Re-charteringthe working group, possibly transitioning it into a
>> Security
>> Working Group to broaden our scope and address related concerns
>> comprehensively. (The current charter can be found here:
>> https://www.ripe.net/community/wg/active-wg/anti-abuse/
>> <https://www.ripe.net/community/wg/active-wg/anti-abuse/>)
>>
>>  2.
>>
>> It is possible we are simply the wrong Co-Chairs at the wrong time, so
>> we
>> can step-downand allow the working group to select new Co-Chairs.
>>
>>  3.
>>
>> Closing the working groupif consensus cannot be reached on a viable
>> path
>> forward.
>>
>>
>> It may be that there are people in the Working Group who are eager to
>> propose new policies, or embark on a project to systematically examine the
>> abuse ecosystem, but over the last year or so, there has been no evidence
>> this is the case.
>>
>>
>> However, we firmly believe that the best course of action is to engage all
>> members of the Anti-Abuse Working Group in an open and transparent
>> discussion about the challenges we face and the opportunities for positive
>> change. Your input and perspectives are invaluable in shaping the future of
>> our community.
>>
>>
>> Therefore, we are inviting you to participate actively in this crucial
>> conversation. We encourage you to share your thoughts, suggestions, and
>> concerns regarding the current state of the working group and your vision
>> for its future direction.
>>
>>
>> Your input will help inform our next steps and guide the evolution of the
>> Anti-Abuse Working Group. We encourage you to share your feedback openly on
>> the mailing list so that all members can participate in the conversation.
>> We hope to discuss the status at RIPE88.
>>
>>
>> Thank you for reading this far. We look forward to your active
>> participation in shaping the future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group.
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Brian, Tobias, Markus
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change
> your subscription options, please visit:
> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg
>
-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Carlos Friaças via anti-abuse-wg]

Hi everyone,

My 2 cents:

I'm clearly for option 1.

Cheers,
Carlos


On Thu, 21 Mar 2024, Alessandro Vesely wrote:


Hi chairs, all,

I think this is a great working group.  Periods of silence are physiological; 
for example, they may arise after a thorough discussion about a proposed 
point which is eventually found to be unfeasible.  The idea to force every 
abuse-c to actually receive email messages and act on them suits that 
example.


If there are security topics that the current charter doesn't cover, 
re-chartering is certainly a good idea.  The chairs are great, especially 
Brian, and I see no reason to select new ones.  Closing the working group 
would be a matter of regret and I hope it's not going to happen.



Best
Ale


On Thu 21/Mar/2024 10:09:00 +0100 Markus de Brün wrote:


Dear Anti-Abuse Working Group Members,


As Co-Chairs, we have been carefully monitoring the discussions on the 
mailing list and are concerned about the current state of stagnation and 
lack of progress.


After consideration and discussion among the Co-Chairs, we believe it is 
necessary to initiate a dialogue regarding the future direction of our 
working group. Some action is needed to revitalise our efforts.



The Co-Chairs have discussed a number of options, both between ourselves 
and with the RIPE Chair Team. However, due to the lack of general 
engagement, and the circular conversations on the list, we see three viable 
options at this point::



 1.

Re-charteringthe working group, possibly transitioning it into a 
Security

Working Group to broaden our scope and address related concerns
comprehensively. (The current charter can be found here:
https://www.ripe.net/community/wg/active-wg/anti-abuse/
)

 2.

It is possible we are simply the wrong Co-Chairs at the wrong time, so 
we

can step-downand allow the working group to select new Co-Chairs.

 3.

Closing the working groupif consensus cannot be reached on a viable 
path

forward.


It may be that there are people in the Working Group who are eager to 
propose new policies, or embark on a project to systematically examine the 
abuse ecosystem, but over the last year or so, there has been no evidence 
this is the case.



However, we firmly believe that the best course of action is to engage all 
members of the Anti-Abuse Working Group in an open and transparent 
discussion about the challenges we face and the opportunities for positive 
change. Your input and perspectives are invaluable in shaping the future of 
our community.



Therefore, we are inviting you to participate actively in this crucial 
conversation. We encourage you to share your thoughts, suggestions, and 
concerns regarding the current state of the working group and your vision 
for its future direction.



Your input will help inform our next steps and guide the evolution of the 
Anti-Abuse Working Group. We encourage you to share your feedback openly on 
the mailing list so that all members can participate in the conversation. 
We hope to discuss the status at RIPE88.



Thank you for reading this far. We look forward to your active 
participation in shaping the future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group.



Best regards,

Brian, Tobias, Markus





--

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change 
your subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg
-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Alessandro Vesely]

Hi chairs, all,

I think this is a great working group.  Periods of silence are physiological; 
for example, they may arise after a thorough discussion about a proposed point 
which is eventually found to be unfeasible.  The idea to force every abuse-c to 
actually receive email messages and act on them suits that example.


If there are security topics that the current charter doesn't cover, 
re-chartering is certainly a good idea.  The chairs are great, especially 
Brian, and I see no reason to select new ones.  Closing the working group would 
be a matter of regret and I hope it's not going to happen.



Best
Ale


On Thu 21/Mar/2024 10:09:00 +0100 Markus de Brün wrote:


Dear Anti-Abuse Working Group Members,


As Co-Chairs, we have been carefully monitoring the discussions on the mailing 
list and are concerned about the current state of stagnation and lack of progress.


After consideration and discussion among the Co-Chairs, we believe it is 
necessary to initiate a dialogue regarding the future direction of our working 
group. Some action is needed to revitalise our efforts.



The Co-Chairs have discussed a number of options, both between ourselves and 
with the RIPE Chair Team. However, due to the lack of general engagement, and 
the circular conversations on the list, we see three viable options at this point::



 1.

Re-charteringthe working group, possibly transitioning it into a Security
Working Group to broaden our scope and address related concerns
comprehensively. (The current charter can be found here:
https://www.ripe.net/community/wg/active-wg/anti-abuse/
)

 2.

It is possible we are simply the wrong Co-Chairs at the wrong time, so we
can step-downand allow the working group to select new Co-Chairs.

 3.

Closing the working groupif consensus cannot be reached on a viable path
forward.


It may be that there are people in the Working Group who are eager to propose 
new policies, or embark on a project to systematically examine the abuse 
ecosystem, but over the last year or so, there has been no evidence this is the 
case.



However, we firmly believe that the best course of action is to engage all 
members of the Anti-Abuse Working Group in an open and transparent discussion 
about the challenges we face and the opportunities for positive change. Your 
input and perspectives are invaluable in shaping the future of our community.



Therefore, we are inviting you to participate actively in this crucial 
conversation. We encourage you to share your thoughts, suggestions, and 
concerns regarding the current state of the working group and your vision for 
its future direction.



Your input will help inform our next steps and guide the evolution of the 
Anti-Abuse Working Group. We encourage you to share your feedback openly on the 
mailing list so that all members can participate in the conversation. We hope 
to discuss the status at RIPE88.



Thank you for reading this far. We look forward to your active participation in 
shaping the future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group.



Best regards,

Brian, Tobias, Markus





--

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg

[anti-abuse-wg] Seeking Input on the Future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group

[Markus de Brün]

*

Dear Anti-Abuse Working Group Members,


As Co-Chairs, we have been carefully monitoring the discussions on the 
mailing list and are concerned about the current state of stagnation and 
lack of progress.


After consideration and discussion among the Co-Chairs, we believe it is 
necessary to initiate a dialogue regarding the future direction of our 
working group. Some action is needed to revitalise our efforts.



The Co-Chairs have discussed a number of options, both between ourselves 
and with the RIPE Chair Team. However, due to the lack of general 
engagement, and the circular conversations on the list, we see three 
viable options at this point::



1.

   Re-charteringthe working group, possibly transitioning it into a
   Security Working Group to broaden our scope and address related
   concerns comprehensively. (The current charter can be found here:
   https://www.ripe.net/community/wg/active-wg/anti-abuse/
   )

2.

   It is possible we are simply the wrong Co-Chairs at the wrong time,
   so we can step-downand allow the working group to select new Co-Chairs.

3.

   Closing the working groupif consensus cannot be reached on a viable
   path forward.


It may be that there are people in the Working Group who are eager to 
propose new policies, or embark on a project to systematically examine 
the abuse ecosystem, but over the last year or so, there has been no 
evidence this is the case.



However, we firmly believe that the best course of action is to engage 
all members of the Anti-Abuse Working Group in an open and transparent 
discussion about the challenges we face and the opportunities for 
positive change. Your input and perspectives are invaluable in shaping 
the future of our community.



Therefore, we are inviting you to participate actively in this crucial 
conversation. We encourage you to share your thoughts, suggestions, and 
concerns regarding the current state of the working group and your 
vision for its future direction.



Your input will help inform our next steps and guide the evolution of 
the Anti-Abuse Working Group. We encourage you to share your feedback 
openly on the mailing list so that all members can participate in the 
conversation. We hope to discuss the status at RIPE88.



Thank you for reading this far. We look forward to your active 
participation in shaping the future of the Anti-Abuse Working Group.



Best regards,

Brian, Tobias, Markus

*-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg