Hi,
> Where in the proposed policy does it say that RIPE is going to de-register
>anyone?
Right at the end it does mention closure of memberships:
>b. Arguments opposing the proposal>>The proposal would result in increased
>workload for RIPE NCC, especially when following up on unresponsive
Peter
Where in the proposed policy does it say that RIPE is going to de-register
anyone?
I can’t see any language for that. All it says is:
“in cases where the “abuse-mailbox:” contact attribute is invalid, the RIPE NCC
will follow up with the resource holder and attempt to correct the
STRONG OPPOSITION!
As an operator who has to read abuse-c emails, this is a waste of my
time. I have real things to do, instead of bothering with this kind of
crap.
Responding to RIPE ping mails does not mean an abuse-c will respond to
emails from non-RIPE entities, nor that a mailbox will keep
