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,
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
On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 at 02:56, Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg
wrote:
>
> Maybe it's time to measure these numbers in the RIPE region by trying a time
> limit experiment.
>
> If it doesn't work, we stop it again. We would have to discuss criteria for
> what "it work" means. That's a discussion I'd
On Thu, 30 Nov 2023 at 13:16, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
>
> On Thu 30/Nov/2023 12:40:46 +0100 Laura Atkins wrote:
> > What happens if / when someone doesn’t?
>
> A minimal, yet useful reaction would be to remove their abuse PoC from RDAP
> pages. If the convention is clear that network operators
On Thu, 30 Nov 2023 at 10:44, Suresh Ramasubramanian
wrote:
>
> The funny part is that the abuse teams of the very same companies will be out
> there in other conferences working earnestly and well on best practices. If
> they were to turn up at a ripe meeting and provide consensus ..
>
> And
Hi Jordi,
On Thu, 30 Nov 2023 at 09:36, jordi.palet--- via anti-abuse-wg
wrote:
[...]
> Each RIR has measured the “level of adoption” as they progressed with the
> initial verification (and this was presented at least a couple of times in
> every RIR), so there are slides in each of them,
Hi Jordi,
On Nov 29, 2023, at 11:29, jordi.palet--- via anti-abuse-wg
wrote:
>
> I agree that the carrot is better than the stick, but if the carrot doesn’t
> work, we need to use the stick.
>
> My original proposal was basically enforcing the NCC to reclaim the resources
> when there is a
Hi Jordi,
On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 at 10:12, jordi.palet--- via anti-abuse-wg
wrote:
[...]
> Is not magic, is ensuring that the NCC has the tools, dictated by a policy,
> to act against those not fulfilling their obligations.
Can you expand on this? What would you have the RIPE NCC do and when?
On Wed, 1 Nov 2023 at 14:26, Gert Doering wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 01, 2023 at 01:45:03PM -0700, Leo Vegoda wrote:
> > The RIPE NCC periodically asks the community about the priority for
> > cleaning up unused ASNs, e.g.
> >
> > - https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/wg/a
Hi,
On Wed, 1 Nov 2023 at 12:51, Gert Doering wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 01, 2023 at 06:06:24PM +, Natale Maria Bianchi wrote:
> > RIPE NCC apparently noted a high number of ASNs being abandoned
> > [https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/2023-June/013757.html]
> > but does not
rchies with multiple abuse
contacts would provide some simple facts to inform the discussion. Is
this possible?
Kind regards,
Leo Vegoda
ection to creating useful tools for people to use when
managing their resources. That said, whenever the data structure is so
complex that a special tool is needed to help people understand it, I
wonder if the real problem is the data structure.
Kind regards,
Leo Vegoda
Hi Denis,
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 1:51 PM ripedenis--- via anti-abuse-wg
wrote:
[...]
> Over time, with large hierarchies, we could end up with very complex
> arrangements with objects, attributes and values that have been overlooked
> and forgotten about. Even though they may have been
nderstanding of these numbers.
Kind regards,
Leo Vegoda
Hi Jordi,
On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 1:54 PM JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
wrote:
[...]
> This is an excellent point but e-mail is probably not the right medium
> for that. Standardizing protocols for reporting abuse - and therefore
> acting on those reports more quickly - would be far more
the
existing model for publishing contact information assumes they won't
recommend changes. Let's wait until they report before asking the RIPE
NCC to build new workflows on a model that the community might want to
change.
Kind regards,
Leo Vegoda
On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 9:25 AM Jeffrey Race wrote:
>
> e-mail must be allowed because most victims
> are not organizations but individual net users
E-mail does not scale well. It was great in the 1990s, when the
Internet was smaller and people knew each other. About half the
world's population
On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 12:16 AM Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg
wrote:
[...]
> - Lastly: It makes our life as Incident responders easier to have a
> uniform way of sending reports, even if not all of them are followed up.
This is an excellent point but e-mail is probably not the right medium
for
for letting network operators
indicate whether or not they will act on abuse reports. If there's no
way of reporting abuse then the operators clearly has no processes for
evaluating reports, or acting on them. This helps everyone save time.
Regards,
Leo Vegoda
dged. But it seems that there would be no obligation for
reports to be investigated or acted upon.
Have I misunderstood what is intended?
Thanks,
Leo Vegoda
20 matches
Mail list logo
