://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/2022-July/007537.html
Your opinions would be appreciated.
cheers
denis
proposal author
--
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
I got the link wrong in the previous email
https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/2022-June/007460.html
Cheers
denis
On Thu, 16 Jun 2022, 17:13 denis walker, wrote:
> Colleagues
>
> After publishing a second version of the policy proposal I have started a
> new conversation
://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/2022-June/007460.html
<https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/2022-June/007458.html>
As it is a Database policy it would be good if we can keep the discussion
in one place on the DB WG mailing list.
cheers
denis
policy proposer
--
To unsubscrib
Hi Angel
On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 at 03:09, Ángel González Berdasco
wrote:
>
> denis wrote:
> In a previous mail you mentioned:
> > When these people apply to be a member I am sure the RIPE NCC requires
> > proof of identity and proof of address.
>
> but -being slightly
Hi Guys
You could add an optional attribute "security-mailbox:" alongside the
"abuse-mailbox:". If present it could be returned in a query with the
abuse-mailbox address by default, or with a specific query. Or
reference it separately with a "sec-c:" attribute
forbid that you have been anything less than clear.
-- I do not agree with the way you folks in Europe nowadays
> value privacy -above- transparency. It is causing obvious disasters and
> I have every faith and confidence that in the fullness of time you'll
> all come to your senses and re
gh consensus that led several wg
chairs and other ripe “names” to just happen to be in the room in time
for a “any other business” session whose agenda was to drop Richard
Cox from his co chair role.
I wasn't there and it has nothing to do with this proposal.
cheers
denis
proposal
On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 at 01:45, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>
> In message
>
> denis walker wrote:
>
> >The bottom line is that there are honest, law abiding people who are,
> >or would like to be, resource holders but are exposed to considerable
> >personal danger
the issues so much that now I will have to answer
your circular, repetitive arguments.
On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 at 00:36, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
>
> In message
>
> denis walker wrote:
>
> >We are talking about restricting access to one piece of data, the
> >address of
rate resources
having the same address. Using the IDs of random people and drunks
from a bar will give them all different addresses. Knowing these
addresses doesn't help you in any way.
Also an LLC is a registered business. Their addresses will remain
public in the database.
cheers
denis
propos
On Mon, 6 Jun 2022 at 19:27, Richard Clayton wrote:
>
> In message jgzda...@mail.gmail.com>, denis walker writes
>
> >On Mon, 6 Jun 2022 at 17:57, Suresh Ramasubramanian
> >wrote:
> >>
> >> Always a useful thing to do if you want to block all
the same location? If so
there are technical ways to offer that functionality within the
database without exposing the full address of natural person members.
cheers
denis
proposal author
>
> --srs
> ____
> Denis walker
>
> you attempt some kind of he
Hi Richard
On Mon, 6 Jun 2022 at 16:15, Richard Clayton wrote:
>
> In message il.com>, denis walker writes
>
> >They were very clear that the address of resource holders is also very
> >important to LEAs in their investigations. So I am going to make a
> >
en I wrote the
policy proposal but I didn't want to be the one to say it. I was
hoping to hear it from other members of the community. Now we have it
on the table.
On Fri, 3 Jun 2022 at 10:29, Hans-Martin Mosner via anti-abuse-wg
wrote:
>
> Am 31.05.22 um 15:12 schrieb denis walker:
> >
Hi Michele
The proposal is here
https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2022-01
cheers
denis
proposal author
On Tue, 31 May 2022 at 18:07, Michele Neylon - Blacknight
wrote:
>
> Denis
>
>
>
> Where’s the actual proposal?
>
>
>
> I’d love to g
to be removed, or hidden from public view. If you have an
opinion about this the conversation is here
https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/2022-May/007432.html
cheers
denis
2022-01 proposal author
--
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your
Why is this not possible? Your list below seems to be a full list of their
IPv4. I got the same list from a simple query. A full list of IPv6 is also
easy to derive.
cheers
denis
co-chair DB-WG
>
> Blocks assigned to ORG-SI6-RIPE (fully aggregated):
>
> 31.3.8.0/21
> 3
necessary technical changes. As long as
we don't break that basic principle of having the one process for
documenting and finding abuse contacts, each of which is singularly
defined, anything else can be changed.
cheers
denis
co-chair DB-WG
On Mon, 14 Feb 2022 at 11:09, Alessandro Vesely wrote
add a new query flag to return both abuse-c
details when available. Or we can modify the abuse-c attribute in some
way so the resource holder can choose what a query returns. Any
behaviour is possible as long as you define what behaviour you want
and the community finds it useful.
chears
denis
co
you
> could have an abuse contact object, that you could modify,
This bit is possible. The ROLE object containing the "abuse-mailbox:"
can be maintained by the end user so they can set their own email
address and change it whenever they wish.
> with the
> main resource linking
Hi Alessandro
On Fri, 21 Jan 2022 at 13:03, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
>
> Hi Denis,
>
> I followed the discussion, and got a rough idea of how it works. At the time,
> I succeeded convincing my ISP (Eutelia) to assign an abuse-mailbox to me.
> Afterwards the policy changed, bu
return the closest abuse
email address to any given IP address. So for any address in the end
user's range it will return their abuse email.
cheers
denis
co-chair DB-WG
On Thu, 20 Jan 2022 at 13:37, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> we all know abuse-c data is to be fill
Colleagues
In advance of my presentations tomorrow, if you have a spare 15
minutes please watch the pre-recorded presentation:
https://ripe83.ripe.net/wp-content/uploads/presentations/DB_WG-Denis_Walker-Purposes83.mp4
cheers
denis
co-chair DSB-WG
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get
it is helpful if people have some idea of your background and
experience. I don't see that as a marketing statement.
cheers
denis
On Mon, 22 Feb 2021 at 18:23, Cynthia Revström via anti-abuse-wg <
anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net> wrote:
> It is possible but I highly doubt it.
>
> > We at Abu
HI Elad
As co-chair of the DB-WG I would like to point out that what you are
talking about.has nothing to do with the RIPE Database. Please don't
use this mailing list for these discussions.
cheers
denis
co-chair DB-WG
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 20:30, Elad Cohen via db-wg wrote:
>
> Yes
ct: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2017-02 New Policy Proposal (Regular abuse-c
Validation)
On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 23:54:44 + (UTC)
denis walker <ripede...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> I have read the proposal and all the comments. Many things have
> already been said. I will try to say something n
HI Vittorio
On 02/08/2017 12:53, Vittorio Bertola wrote:
Il 2 agosto 2017 alle 12.23 denis <ripede...@yahoo.co.uk> ha scritto:
It is not a question of 'getting heard', it is knowing you have a
voice and where to use it. Literally anyone can join a discussion on
a Working Group m
Hi Vittorio
On 02/08/2017 12:03, Vittorio Bertola wrote:
Il 1 agosto 2017 alle 23.47 denis <ripede...@yahoo.co.uk> ha scritto:
"Part of my job is to help LEAs understand this process and how
their suggestions on changing policy would impact the broader RIPE
community, suc
ollowing process. That is why they write
documentation, run training courses and have Customer Support. Whether
it is written or not, it has been said many times that the PDO will
assist anyone who wishes to write a policy proposal.
cheers
denis
rgds,
Sascha Luck
Hi Andre
I have just read this whole thread (one day I will get a life). I would like to
make an observation and a suggestion.
First the observation. You seem to be making the same point many, many times.
You believe that Twitter is a spammer and no one will do anything about it. I
think that
Colleagues
I have just sent a proposal to the DB-WG for fixing the issues with "abuse-c:".
If you are not subscribed to the DB-WG you can find the
proposal:https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/2017-April/005520.html
cheers
denis
co-chair DB-WG
Hi Andre
I thought the IRT object (Incident Response Team) existed for large scale DDOS
attack situations? One of the reasons for creating the "abuse-c:" attribute was
because the IRT object was being hijacked for the 'less serious' complaints.
cheers
denis
co-chair DB-WG
Hi Daniel
Thanks for that suggestion. It has given me some ideas and I already have half
a proposal in mind based on thiswhich I will submit when I fill in the
other half...
cheersdenisco-chair DB-WG
From: Daniel Stolpe <sto...@resilans.se>
To: denis walker <ripede...@ya
rs without an in depth knowledge of the database or industry
need to easily understand 'who' claims to be behind an email address then we
may need a more complex solution.
I hope this makes sense and look forward to comments and questions.
cheers
denis
co-chair DB-WG
lists. Sometimes I post and many list members reject my mails
because of DMARC policies. As I don't have a corporate email address I
have limited options.
cheers
denis
On 2017-02-20 15:54, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
Datev.de isn’t even an ISP it looks like a software firm to me
gesperrt vom DATEV WebRadar,
http://webradar.datev.de/lookup?domain=xs4all.nl, servertime=Feb 20
02:16:47, server=idvmailin04.datev.com, client=194.109.24.26
cheers
denis
On 20/02/2017 14:58, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
On 20-Feb-2017, at 2:22 AM, denis <ripede...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
if this is not the final solution, as a temporary fix it could be up and
running so easily and improve the confidence in the IRR.
cheers
denis
rs and NCC staff who
you expect to be on the lists) who commented on the technical lists over
a year was very small indeed. I don't expect much to change in the near
future...
cheers
denis
Best regards,
- Håvard
process. This is a cartel of old timers
who make all the decisions so they get their own way. This needs to be
fixed.
cheers
denis
Strong +1.
Ditto.
- Håvard
being able to reference my person: object but
having to create a role: for myself is a bit silly.
It is called standardisation. Although I am sure you will not believe me
it does actually simplify the data model if you do things in a standard
way :)
cheers
denis
gert
Hi Suresh
On 07/03/2016 11:43, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
On 07-Mar-2016, at 4:08 PM, denis <ripede...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
The "abuse-c:" IS standardised. It is well defined and documented
as THE method of defining abuse contact details in the RIPE
Database accordi
Hi Niall
On 07/03/2016 11:52, Niall O'Reilly wrote:
On 7 Mar 2016, at 10:29, denis wrote:
Don't make emotive, vague comments like thisexplain with facts.
and a little further on:
When you work that one out they can apply the same principle to
"abuse-c:". Problem solved...
om
the database rather than pull out blocks of raw data for human readable,
manual interpretation.
cheers
denis
remarks:+---+ remarks:
| In case of complaints use the contact | remarks:|
information in the role object below. | remarks:
+---+
with
the irr data in a single whois hell. newer folk seem to think they are
the same.
...whilst the older folk are creating a new hell by clinging to the past
and burying their heads in the sand...
cheers
denis
randy
management concerns of a 21st
century, global resource.
The more I hear long term, experienced internet people like yourself and
Randy constantly criticising the role of the RIRs and wishing for the
old days, the more I fear for the future of the internet.
cheers
denis
On 03/03/2016 19:54, Gert
Hi Gert
I published some ideas almost 2 years ago on how we could improve abuse-c
https://labs.ripe.net/Members/denis/suggestions-for-improving-abuse-handling
I am not saying these are a perfect solution either, but no one was
interested in discussing ways forward...
...dare I also say
.
cheers
denis
When "abuse-c:" was first proposed, Tobias (co-chair of Anti Abuse WG)
and I spent a lot of time discussing how to achieve the intended goal.
We came up with the current implementation, which after community
discussion was approved. But you never think of everything in
Hi Job, Tim
On 12/11/2015 16:57, Job Snijders wrote:
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 02:52:36PM +0100, denis wrote:
From what I understood from Gert and Randy's comments it is a user's
choice where to put a ROUTE object and there seem to be some reasons
why they sometimes choose to put it in the RIPE
scratch. There is a system to check for unreferenced
PERSON objects that runs every day. If an object has not been referenced
for 90 days it is deleted.
cheers
denis
It will obviously require work. Very rough initial estimates
indicate it can take up to a few months. We can refine
Hi Ronald
On 06/11/2015 22:44, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
In message <563c8773.7000...@yahoo.co.uk>,
denis <ripede...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
It may seem like I am quibbling over a minor semantic point here, and
perhaps I am, but I think that it is somewhat inaccurate to say
ign' AUT-NUM objects could be immediately
deleted. (Or after allowing time for these ASN holders to make sure
their routing policy is actually up to date in the authoritative AUT-NUM
object.)
cheers
denis
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
aybe the DB WG will pick it up :)
cheers
denis
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
HI Ronald
On 05/11/2015 23:44, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
In message <563a6462.7080...@yahoo.co.uk>,
denis <ripede...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
You{r} talk about privacy and this whole thread is about making lots of
personal data public and how many over engineered processes can be
this convoluted way. The data model allows it.
cheers
denis
Unfortunately, I am not at liberty to share that evidence just
yet.
Ahaha.
Laugh now... while you can.
Regards,
rfg
Hi Ronald
On 06/11/2015 00:58, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
In message <563bdb1c.4020...@yahoo.co.uk>,
denis <ripede...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
On 05/11/2015 21:33, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
In message <637758753.2826426.1446595528880.javamail.ya...@mail.yahoo.com>,
ripede...
bjects
will be perfectly valid. They just have no relationship with you.
cheers
denis
Regards,
rfg
that puts the brake on ideas. They provide technical
advice during discussions and do an impact analysis if a consensus is
reached. But that is where the problem often occurs. Trying to get a
consensus when there are many different views and strong opinions.
cheers
denis
The NCC Impact
to the public. There are many ways to be contactable.
But few people are even willing to discuss possibilities when it comes
to changing the data model.
cheers
denis
community and talks with the WG chairs. In the end, when the
RIPE NCC thinks it has worked out the best way to achieve
reaffirm the cleanup process.
cheers
Denis Walker
Independent Netizen
On 06/05/2015 17:18, Tim Bruijnzeels
wrote:
Dear colleagues,
On 05 May 2015, at 15:59,
denis walker ripede...
59 matches
Mail list logo
