Hi Ronald
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 01:10:01PM -0800, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
I'm just putting myself in their shoes. If I were them, and I was
asked my opinion about something that, in the short run at least.
would, increase my workload, I would scream, holler, tear my
hair out, pound my fis
In message , "Karl-Josef Ziegler" wrote:
>Several years ago I already got a postcard with a verification code to prove
>that my postal address is correct. And this was not a paid service but a large
>freemailer with thousands of customers. So, no it's not rocket science and
>yes it was already
I don't think it can be done without turning the NCC into
something like the NSA and even then I doubt it would be 100%
effective.
Many governments throughout history have tried to have all the
data they can on their citizens...
I am not persuaded that this is at all a valid or fair comparison.
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 02:57:21PM -0800, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
Just curious... How would automated verification of snail-mail
addresses and/or positive automated verification of contact phone
numbers implicate any contractual issues?
This particular mechanism may or may not. That's for NC
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 02:44:15PM -0800, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
That having been said it might still be either necessary or
advisable to put a CAPTCHA in front of the RIPE account creation
process, e.g. if there isn't one there already, just to stop
some mindless automaton from trying to cre
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 01:10:01PM -0800, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
I'm just putting myself in their shoes. If I were them, and I was
asked my opinion about something that, in the short run at least.
would, increase my workload, I would scream, holler, tear my
hair out, pound my fist on the tab
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 12:49:34PM -0800, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
Police have guns. They have handcuffs. They can arrest people.
As long as RIPE's only power is to kick certain bogus and/or poorly
maintained records out of the data base, there seems little danger
that RIPE will functionall
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 09:02:42PM +0100, denis wrote:
It has served very well over the years but it does have limitations
now. This is a database. You put stuff in and get stuff out. When you
need a full day course to learn the basics of putting stuff in, it
shouts there is a problem.
I don'
In message <20151103143413.gi47...@cilantro.c4inet.net>,
"Sascha Luck [ml]" wrote:
>On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 03:14:54PM +0100, Esa Laitinen wrote:
>>as you seem to have quite a knowledge about this I'm sure you
>>already have an idea on how the data can be up to date. Care to
>>share?
>
>I don't
In message ,
Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
>Right now, most other lists that I see this thread start up on, there
>are a few people who defend RIPE NCC - and a lot of people who dump on
>it for this kind of thing.
I like to think that I am neither defending nor dumping on either
RIPE or RIPE N
In message <20151103134918.gf47...@cilantro.c4inet.net>,
"Sascha Luck [ml]" wrote:
>Any contractual changes will also need membership approval via GM
>vote anyway.
Just curious... How would automated verification of snail-mail
addresses and/or positive automated verification of contact phone
n
In message <0f2494d8-d060-4496-807a-abbe30d26...@gmail.com>,
(in response to Sascha Luck)
Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
>I doubt -
>
>1. You are being asked to code this for RIPE NCC
>...
For the record, I agree completely with Sascha Luck on this one.
CAPTCHAs are an awful idea in this conte
In message <20151103134248.ge47...@cilantro.c4inet.net>,
"Sascha Luck [ml]" wrote:
>On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 02:28:03PM +0100, David Hofstee wrote:
>>In that line of thought: I would like email validation on a
>>regular basis. There are so many email addresses that do not
>>work properly (what t
In message <78C35D6C1A82D243B830523B4193CF5F9F4EF1D606@SBS1.blinker.local>,
David Hofstee wrote:
>Neither do I. But what I do think is that RIPE should do the work that it
>is set out to do, namely registration of data. It should do that very well.
>Make sure that the data is sufficient, valid a
In message <7780cec5-e3ef-444b-a734-8de4dfb57...@steffann.nl>,
Sander Steffann wrote:
>I now understand your ideas better, and understand that you are looking
>for a first step in improving the database accuracy. Not looking for a
>complete solution as I was :) I think we reached the point whe
Brian,
My apologies for not responding yesterday. I've been working on
what I think is a REALLY important project... one that even
relates to some of what's been discussed here... and I just
got totally caught up in that yesterday (and probably will
again today).
In message <56388a61.7040...@he
Do you feel that the numbers community comparing notes with the ICANN whois EWG
would help?
https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-3-2015-09-25-en
> On 05-Nov-2015, at 1:32 AM, denis wrote:
>
> Seriously, with a review of the data model we can end up with:
> -a lot less personal data in the
Hi Sascha
On 04/11/2015 19:42, Sascha Luck [ml] wrote:
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 06:17:10PM +0100, denis wrote:
My main point was the chain of trust for resource holders and
resource managers. Also being contactable does not mean personal
contact data must be displayed to the public. There ar
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 06:17:10PM +0100, denis wrote:
That may well be right, but if the sponsor cannot understand the
language of the resource holder the validation may not be very
effective.
The price you pay for a globalised society. I can see your point
but this isn't something you can pre
Hi Denis,
Op 4 nov. 2015, om 18:17 heeft denis het volgende
geschreven:
> On 04/11/2015 15:32, Sascha Luck [ml] wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 12:05:28AM +, ripede...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>> the sponsoring LIR should be restricted to an LIR in the same
>>> geographical/political/language a
Hi Sascha
On 04/11/2015 15:32, Sascha Luck [ml] wrote:
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 12:05:28AM +, ripede...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
the sponsoring LIR should be restricted to an LIR in the same
geographical/political/language area as the end user resource
holder. Otherwise it could render the whole n
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 11:30:50AM -0500, Jeffrey Race wrote:
From an engineering standpoint you absolutely must have
at least one redundant channel, with an acknowledgement
mechanism (e.g. registered mail). But fax is also possible for this
because the receipt is stamped with date/time of rec
On Wed, 4 Nov 2015 14:32:30 +, Sascha Luck [ml] wrote:
>There is a need to be able to reach a resource holder to notify
>them of abuse coming from their network (the abuse-c) or
>technical problems (the tech-c). There is NO need to have the
>street address and phone number of every *person* "wh
By Sander Steffann
How do you propose to distinguish people/companies with bad intentions (for
some value of bad, let's assume "planning to send spam") from normal
companies?
With a crystal ball or being victimized of them. As a victim - with disabled
WPOISON - you may denounce and evaluate t
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 12:05:28AM +, ripede...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
the sponsoring LIR should be restricted to an LIR in the same
geographical/political/language area as the end user resource
holder. Otherwise it could render the whole notion of an LIR
validating their sponsored user's data po
On Wed, 4 Nov 2015 11:22:57 +
James Hoddinott wrote:
You should sit up and read this thread carefully as the principles
involved in these explanations are those that are among those that
are shaping the course of the Internet.
> Looking some more into the 'why' here, it looks like it relate
On Wed, 4 Nov 2015 10:20:51 +
James Hoddinott wrote:
> Hi Andre,
>
Hello James :)
> I don't think they are Evil Corp and this is little more than spam
> filtering on a role address (which you can debate ad-infinitum if you
nope. no debate - simply broken if you advice on bounce to contact m
Hi Andre,
I don't think they are Evil Corp and this is little more than spam filtering on
a role address (which you can debate ad-infinitum if you like). I did spot that
your replies on this thread were flagged as spam by us and since we provide
them some services I dug in a little more and can
On Wed, 4 Nov 2015 14:27:42 +0530
Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> First - I have a great amount of respect for Nat - he was a colleague
> at IBM (where he used to be for years) before he left to join
> Mimecast.
>
Okay, but maybe he is no longer there, etc. Even though one person is
great, good,
First - I have a great amount of respect for Nat - he was a colleague at IBM
(where he used to be for years) before he left to join Mimecast.
That said - I am going to ask him to have someone investigate any email you
have sent mime cast, and why it bounced - or whether there is an unfiltered
a
On Wed, 4 Nov 2015 13:48:51 +0530
Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> Mimecast’s chief scientist is Nathaniel Borenstein - who originally
> wrote the MIME spec.
> They are legit. I am not sure what is going on here.
>
thank you for the reference Mr Ramasubramanian, would you do me the
kind favor of
Mimecast’s chief scientist is Nathaniel Borenstein - who originally wrote the
MIME spec.
They are legit. I am not sure what is going on here.
> On 04-Nov-2015, at 1:14 PM, an...@ox.co.za wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Has anyone of you had much/any dealings with this crowd: Mimecast.com ?
>
> Less th
32 matches
Mail list logo
