It appears that U.Mutlu said:
>So, what to do if the hoster is uncooperative, like in this case?
>Where else to complain, what else to do?
If their ASN info is to be believed, they're in Bulgaria. It's unlikely anyone
there cares.
Just block their network 80.94.95.0/24 and forget about it.
FW
John Levine wrote:
> It appears that U.Mutlu said:
> > So, what to do if the hoster is uncooperative, like in this case?
> > Where else to complain, what else to do?
>
> If their ASN info is to be believed, they're in Bulgaria. It's
> unlikely anyone there cares.
>
> Just block their network 80
Maybe there is a WHOIS or ASN error:
Trying the following gives a different company for the said IP:
$ whois 80.94.94.254
% Abuse contact for '80.94.92.0 - 80.94.95.255' is 'ab...@bunea.eu'
I now have filed the AR also to that new address.
Ángel González Berdasco via anti-abuse-wg wrote on 1
U.Mutlu wrote:
> Maybe there is a WHOIS or ASN error:
> Trying the following gives a different company for the said IP:
>
> $ whois 80.94.94.254
>
> % Abuse contact for '80.94.92.0 - 80.94.95.255' is 'ab...@bunea.eu'
>
> I now have filed the AR also to that new address.
Asking for 80.94.94.x re
We had a policy proposal to ensure that the abuse mailbox was valid and
monitored, but this community didn’t liked it. In other regions it works and it
proven to be a very valid tool.
Should we restart that discussion? I’m happy to resubmit the proposal then.
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
> El
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 01, 2023 at 10:10:45AM +0100, jordi.palet--- via anti-abuse-wg
wrote:
> We had a policy proposal to ensure that the abuse mailbox was valid and
> monitored, but this community didn???t liked it. In other regions it works
> and it proven to be a very valid tool.
You failed to de
I think this community let's the perfect be the enemy of the possible.
Just because there are traffic rules doesn't mean people don't violate
them. But they violate them much less.
See, what I fear is, that at some stage states will start to regulate,
because the industry fails to do so. And
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 01, 2023 at 10:50:20AM +0100, Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg wrote:
> We do this in many other places, it's called voluntary norms for responsible
> behaviour, and is seen as a great tool to improve things. Happy to explain
> more if there is an interest.
It's not like these norms d
It appears that � ngel Gonzalez Berdasco via anti-abuse-wg
said:
>> Just block their network 80.94.95.0/24 and forget about it.
>organisation: ORG-BA1515-RIPE
>org-name: BtHoster LTD
>country:GB
>org-type: OTHER
>address:26, New Kent Road, London, SE1 6TJ, UNITED KI
We have had 2017-02, which is basically the same as yours 2019-04, except the
validation will be done 2x more often.
But the abuse-c validation does work. What's the problem then?
--
Sergey
> On Nov 1, 2023, at 05:10, jordi.palet--- via anti-abuse-wg
> wrote:
>
> We had a policy proposal
> It's not like these norms do not exist today - abuse contacts have to
> be provided already today. Responsible ISPs read these mailboxes and
> act upon them.
>
> Forcing everybody through a "you must click here to validate your
> abuse contact, otherwise bad things will happen to your resources
e. I do not expect you
to respond to it outside of your usual working hours.
From: anti-abuse-wg on behalf of Gert Doering
Date: Wednesday, 1 November 2023 at 10:21
To: jordi.pa...@consulintel.es
Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net , U.Mutlu
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Report ignored. What to d
On Wed, Nov 01, 2023 at 01:55:42PM +0100, John Levine wrote:
> It appears that ? ngel Gonzalez Berdasco via anti-abuse-wg
> said:
> >> Just block their network 80.94.95.0/24 and forget about it.
>
> >organisation: ORG-BA1515-RIPE
> >org-name: BtHoster LTD
> >country:GB
> >org-typ
Thank you for your interesting analysis.
Is then RIPE not a "partner in crime" for such criminal companies?
B/c it seems RIPE does not take any action against such evidently
criminal members abusing the network and the other members and users.
RIPE just says this ( https://www.ripe.net/support/ab
Hi,
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 seem to note the relation with abuse that should explain a
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 01, 2023 at 07:44:45PM +0100, U.Mutlu wrote:
> Thank you for your interesting analysis.
>
> Is then RIPE not a "partner in crime" for such criminal companies?
"RIPE" is the community, all of us, including you.
So yes. But not the way you think.
Gert Doering
-- NetMaste
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 s
Hi,
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/active-wg/db/minutes/ripe-52
> (item G), and
> - https://ripe82.ripe.net/presentatio
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/active-wg/db/minutes/ripe-52
>
Leo,
On 01/11/2023 22.37, Leo Vegoda wrote:
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/w
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 02, 2023 at 09:21:01AM +0100, Shane Kerr wrote:
> (*) I guess? I admit to never having read the details of how charging is
> set, since I have never represented a RIPE NCC member.
members vote at the RIPE AGM, to select one out of a number of possible
charging schemes proposed by
: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Report ignored. What to do as next?
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised
sources.
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 02, 2023 at 09:21:01AM +0100, Shane Kerr wrote:
> (*) I guess? I admit to never having read the details of how charging is
> se
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 02, 2023 at 09:19:13AM +, Michele Neylon - Blacknight wrote:
> That?s a massive over simplification of what happened.
>
> The NCC proposed a number of charging schemes which *included* charges per
> ASN. The proposal was rejected by the majority of the members who voted
> be
Gert
The ASN cost for us would have had practically no impact – we only have two and
I suspect we’re getting rid of one at some point.
However the other costs that the charging schemes suggested would have cost us
thousands – and that simply wasn’t acceptable
Michele
--
Mr Michele Neylon
Bla
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 02, 2023 at 09:29:52AM +, Michele Neylon - Blacknight wrote:
> The ASN cost for us would have had practically no impact ? we only have two
> and I suspect we?re getting rid of one at some point.
>
> However the other costs that the charging schemes suggested would have cost
Gert
I think a lot of us were not going to accept ANY changes to the charging scheme
that time round.
Anyway .. history now ..
Michele
--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
https://www.blacknight.com/
https://blacknight.blog/
Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
Direct
Just to give a feedback:
Yesterday I had complained about the said IP 80.94.95.181 also to RIPE NCC
via their WebMail contact page, which went to supp...@ripe.net
and opened a ticket: https://www.ripe.net/contact-form
Luckily the worst hacking attempts originating from these IPs
finally have sto
Moin,
On Wed, Nov 01, 2023 at 02:37:27PM -0700, Leo Vegoda wrote:
> Sure, but that's a membership decision and not a community decision.
this perceived disconnect is a re-occuring scheme and therefore
deserves a bit more thought, albeit not in this WG but likely
in NCC Services and/or Address Po
anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Report ignored. What to do as next?
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised
sources.
Moin,
On Wed, Nov 01, 2023 at 02:37:27PM -0700, Leo Vegoda wrote:
> Sure, but that's a membership decision and not a community decision.
th
> On 1 Nov 2023, at 13:56, John Levine wrote:
>
> It appears that à ngel Gonzalez Berdasco via anti-abuse-wg
> said:
>>> Just block their network 80.94.95.0/24 and forget about it.
>
>> organisation: ORG-BA1515-RIPE
>> org-name: BtHoster LTD
>> country:GB
>> org-type: O
2017-02 doesn’t enforce people really using the abuse-c, neither it constitutes
a policy violation to have fake data or non-responsible mailboxes.
You can check how my proposal reached consensus in APNIC and LACNIC and
radically changed the situation in both regions, so it is very successful.
R
Hi,
On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 09:39:28AM +0100, jordi.palet--- via anti-abuse-wg
wrote:
> 2017-02 doesn???t enforce people really using the abuse-c,
Neither does your proposal to require verification... all it does is
require "if a mail from the NCC comes in, click on the confirmation
button".
Well, it worked in other 2 regions, and one more AFRINIC also accepted it, just
waiting for the (hopefully) re-constituted board ratification.
Is not magic, is ensuring that the NCC has the tools, dictated by a policy, to
act against those not fulfilling their obligations.
Regards,
Jordi
@jord
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?
T
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 persistent violation of resolving abuse cases. This can be
progressive, such as not allowing
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Report ignored. What to do as next?
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 persistent violation of
Jordi
Can you please provide links to the policies that were implemented elsewhere.
Regards
Michele
--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
https://www.blacknight.com/
https://blacknight.blog/
Intl. +353 (0) 59 9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Personal b
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 Leo,
I don’t see it as a regulator, I see it as one of the functions of a RIR. Not
just provide numbers, but also ensure that they are being used fairly and
according community agreed policies. Otherwise we could also say that other
reasons for recovery are invalid because we become a regula
Hi Leo,
The definition of a regulator is an entity that sets and enforces rules on the
persons it supervises.
If the RIPE NCC goes further than just providing numbers, and instead enforces
rules on usage associated with them (note that this doesn't even concern the
use of the numbers themselve
We do that already. We setup rules and enforce them in all the 5 RIRs.
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
> El 30 nov 2023, a las 9:39, Matthias Merkel
> escribió:
>
> Hi Leo,
>
> The definition of a regulator is an entity that sets and enforces rules on
> the persons it supervises.
>
> If the RI
The RIPE community sets rules for the operation of the RIPE NCC, not rules
imposed on any network operators.
—
Maria Merkel
[https://cdn.staclar.com/logos/novecore/newlogo.png]
This email was sent by Staclar, Inc. Any statements contained in this email are
personal to the author and are not nec
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, sho
I do not agree
Every organization has rules it enforces. That doesn't make it a
regulator. The public transport here, where I live enforces that you
have a valid ticket. That doesn't make it the transport regulator.
In fact RIPE NCC will probably enforce that you pay your fees.
The issue her
Hi Serge,
The difference is the scope of the rules.
All organizations, including the RIPE NCC, enforce rules as part of their own
business, for example with customers, etc.
What is being proposed here is imposing rules on unrelated things. Abuse isn't
inherently of the resources provided by RI
In APNIC, LACNIC or AFRINIC, just to set an example, leasing of addresses
(unless for “connected customers”) is not allowed.
If you do so, and the staff realize it, or somebody reports it to the staff,
then you will get a warning, or a few of them across a certain period of time,
you will get p
Well, I can personally feel it when comparing abuse reporting in those regions
(before and after the policy implementation) vs RIPE. That’s sufficient for me.
I call it results.
Also, when the LIRs don’t respond to abuse cases or abuse-c emails bounce, I
can ask the relevant RIR to resolve it,
That would not make them regulators because those are rules on the addresses
themselves, which are services provided by the RIR.
Enforcing a certain type of abuse handling or prevention would be rules on the
services addressed by the addresses, which are not part of the services
provided by the
>From the RIPE NCC LIR Account Agreement (the "Agreement”)
>https://www.ripe.net/about-us/legal/ripe-ncc-lir-account-agreement
3.6 If the Member fails to comply with the RIPE Policies and RIPE NCC
procedures as outlined in Section B.1 of the RIPE NCC procedural document
‘Closure of Members, Der
This is why we shouldn't have a policy like this.
The existing policies are on the resources themselves and the services the NCC
provides. If we create a policy that regulated services provided by RIPE NCC
members, it will be binding, but that will then make the NCC a regulator.
—
Maria Merkel
anti-abuse-wg
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 2:23:54 PM
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Report ignored. What to do as next?
I do not agree
Every organization has rules it enforces. That doesn't make it a
regulator. The public transport here, where I live enf
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
As I said
I disagree. Gmail says what you can do with their accounts, that doesn't
make them a regulator. But it doesn't matter: At the end of the day it's
excuses to not do anything about a growing problem.
And what typically happens in such cases is that states get upset and
start dictatin
Of course, this is not how consensus works.
I also think you're misunderstanding my argument. I'm all for fighting abuse. A
lot of my work is in abuse and fraud prevention and in the prevention of
financial crime. I'm not arguing against preventing abuse, only against adding
even more regulator
: [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Report ignored. What to do as next?
As I said
I disagree. Gmail says what you can do with their accounts, that doesn't
make them a regulator. But it doesn't matter: At the end of the day it's
excuses to not do anything about a growing problem.
And what typic
From: anti-abuse-wg on behalf of Matthias
Merkel
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 3:24:02 PM
To: Leo Vegoda ; Suresh Ramasubramanian
Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Report ignored. What to do as next?
Of course, this is not how consensus works.
I also think you&#x
: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net<mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>
mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>>
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Report ignored. What to do as next?
Of course, this is not how consensus works.
I also think you're misunderstanding my argument. I'm all for fighting abu
PM
To: Suresh Ramasubramanian ; Leo Vegoda
Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Report ignored. What to do as next?
I have already noted that I have no objections to a proposal solely to verify
abuse mailbox functionality, but that we should be careful adding anything
m>>;
Leo Vegoda mailto:l...@vegoda.org>>
Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net<mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>
mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>>
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Report ignored. What to do as next?
I have already noted that I have no objections to a proposal solely to verif
it is involved in or
>> provide any form of investment advice.
>>
>>> On November 30, 2023 at 11:25 AM GMT+1 ops.li...@gmail.com
>>> <mailto:ops.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> This is simply an ongoing verification that the justifica
>>
*Cc:* anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net <mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>
mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>>
*Subject:* Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Report ignored. What to do as next?
I have already noted that I have no objections to a proposal solely to
verify abuse mailbox functionality, but t
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 w
As long as you publish it
--srs
From: anti-abuse-wg on behalf of Leo Vegoda
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 6:08:59 PM
To: Alessandro Vesely
Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Report ignored. What to do as next?
On Thu, 30 Nov
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 09:53:54AM +0100, Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg wrote:
> And as long as this group cannot come up with a compromise nothing will
> change, in essence the anti-abuse wg is taken hostage by the nay sayers.
> These discussions have been going on for years. Nothing new has c
> On 30 Nov 2023, at 12:38, Leo Vegoda wrote:
>
> 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
>
careful and safe driver.
--srs
From: anti-abuse-wg on behalf of Gert Doering
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 7:51:20 PM
To: Serge Droz
Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Report ignored. What to do as next?
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 09
For each complaint to RIPE NCC then such an
(automated) email should be sent by the RIPE NCC
to the abuse-c of that member.
This should be the absolute minimum that should be done by the RIPE NCC.
Matthias Merkel wrote on 11/30/23 11:47:
The proposal is to send verification emails to abuse mail
None of this will make a company who doesn’t want to deal with abuse complaints
deal with abuse complaints. It’s a total waste of resources.
laura
> On 1 Dec 2023, at 10:53, U.Mutlu wrote:
>
> For each complaint to RIPE NCC then such an
> (automated) email should be sent by the RIPE NCC
> to
It will make some organizations start handling reports that didn't do it
before.
We tried this in Switzerland, sending all ISPs abuse data asking them to
deal with it. In the beginning, very little enthusiasm, today most do.
None of these proposals have ever been tries, yet your you insist on
AOB session when Cox was
absent to vote him out, I’ll stand enlightened.
--srs
From: anti-abuse-wg on behalf of Serge Droz
via anti-abuse-wg
Date: Friday, 1 December 2023 at 6:22 PM
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Report ignored. What to do as next?
It will make
If sending notifications is so effective and you already have the
infrastructure in place to do it, then why involve RIPE? Can’t you just send
the notices?
laura
> On 1 Dec 2023, at 12:52, Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg
> wrote:
>
> It will make some organizations start handling reports tha
Laura Atkins wrote on 12/01/23 13:22:
> None of this will make a company who doesn’t want to deal with abuse
> complaints deal with abuse complaints. It’s a total waste of resources.
Then RIPE has to sanction that member.
Example of ignored Abuse Reports regarding email hacking attempts:
You ge
> On 1 Dec 2023, at 13:22, U.Mutlu wrote:
>
> Laura Atkins wrote on 12/01/23 13:22:
> > None of this will make a company who doesn’t want to deal with abuse
> > complaints deal with abuse complaints. It’s a total waste of resources.
>
> Then RIPE has to sanction that member.
So we’re back to:
Well … exactly the same way it has been already implemented in 2 other RIRs,
working and no issues.
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
> El 1 dic 2023, a las 14:28, Laura Atkins escribió:
>
>
>
>> On 1 Dec 2023, at 13:22, U.Mutlu wrote:
>>
>> Laura Atkins wrote on 12/01/23 13:22:
>> > None of th
] Abuse Report ignored. What to do as next?
So we’re back to: how much will it cost to do this and how much will it
actually improve anything?
Which ignores a lot of big questions like: does RIPE actually have the
authority to sanction folks,
--
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a
A lot of what is being requested in this thread seems outside of RIPEs
remit and raises endless questions about responsibility / overreach. RIPEs
job is to manage the distribution and registration of resources across
members as efficiently and fairly as possible - I've only been a member for
a few
king hours.
From: anti-abuse-wg on behalf of
jordi.palet--- via anti-abuse-wg
Date: Friday, 1 December 2023 at 13:38
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Report ignored. What to do as next?
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecogn
ur usual working hours.
>
>
>From: anti-abuse-wg on behalf of
>jordi.palet--- via anti-abuse-wg
>Date: Friday, 1 December 2023 at 13:38
>To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
>Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Report ignored. What to do as next?
>[EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution
via anti-abuse-wg
Date: Friday, 1 December 2023 at 13:38
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Report ignored. What to do as next?
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised
sources.
Well … exactly the same way it has been already impleme
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 li
of Serge Droz
via anti-abuse-wg
Date: Sunday, 3 December 2023 at 10:57
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Abuse Report ignored. What to do as next?
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] Please use caution when opening attachments from unrecognised
sources.
Maybe it's time to measure these
Hi,
On Mon, Dec 04, 2023 at 09:40:22AM +, Michele Neylon - Blacknight via
anti-abuse-wg wrote:
> The claim is that the change in policy had an impact in other regions.
> If that is true then where is the data to backup that assertion?
Especially: saying "it feels less painful to send abuse c
On Tue 05/Dec/2023 15:17:59 +0100 Gert Doering wrote:
On Mon, Dec 04, 2023 at 09:40:22AM +, Michele Neylon - Blacknight via
anti-abuse-wg wrote:
The claim is that the change in policy had an impact in other regions.
If that is true then where is the data to backup that assertion?
Especial
83 matches
Mail list logo
