Re: [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE Charter

Hi Ronald, May I propose to do a call and explain a bit about the community and the NCC roles ? And the WG's etc ? Regards, Erik Bais Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPhone > Op 11 aug. 2016 om 01:37 heeft Ronald F. Guilmette > het volgende geschreven: > > > You all

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE Charter

You all already know that I'm no good at all at this whole brevity thing, but I'll try. First I must thank Sander Steffann for helping me to understand the rather confusing relationship between "RIPE" and "RIPE NCC". The latter has a formal legal charter, which I assume is

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE Charter

In *policy* matters, like "under which rules does the RIPE NCC hand out IP addresses", the RIPE *community* decides, by following the policy development process the community has given itself. The NCC acts as the secretariat that manages the resources according to these policies. Well, even a

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE Charter

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 12:27:04PM -0700, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: I'm still trying to understand. RIPE is *not* RIPE NCC and vise versa, correct? I mean they are two different things, legally speaking, yes? A person or legal entity could be a member of "RIPE" and yet not be a member of

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE Charter

In message <57ab1227.1070...@iszt.hu>, Janos Zsako wrote: >No, but you can find the RIPE NCC's Articles of Association at >https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-602 Thank you! That document is most helpful. >RIPE does not have "authority" over RIPE NCC, it is the

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE Charter

Hi, On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 01:38:15PM +0200, Janos Zsako wrote: > > and only under the > > auspices and authority of RIPE itself? > > RIPE does not have "authority" over RIPE NCC, it is the members. In many > cases the RIPE community and the RIPE NCC membership overlap, but not > always. I

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE Charter

Dear Ronald F. Guilmette I've read on the Ripe.Net site that RIPE is formally constituted as a formal "association" under Dutch law. I think there is a small misunderstanding. RIPE is not formally constituted. It is the RIPE NCC which is, and it is an association under Dutch law, as you say

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 58, Issue 10

Hi, On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 06:50:31AM -0300, Marilson wrote: > This is better than stand-up comic! You *do* know that lack of proper quoting is considered abusive behaviour? Gert Doering -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AGVorstand: Sebastian v.

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 58, Issue 10

This is better than stand-up comic! From: anti-abuse-wg-requ...@ripe.net Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 5:08 AM To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net Subject: anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 58, Issue 10 Send anti-abuse-wg mailing list submissions to anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse: dnsbl - trust and other factors

On Wed, 10 Aug 2016 14:05:51 +0530 Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > There is something that Spamhaus, after operating a respected and > widely used block list since the 90s, understands and you don't > The focus isn't just blocking spam, any random wannabe bofh can do > that.