- anti-abuse-wg - mailman.ripe.net

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
by Gert Doering 19 May '19

19 May '19

Hi, On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 09:55:14PM +0000, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Are they is the question > > For example - ARIN just reclaimed a large number of IPs from an actor that created a large number of shell companies. http://m.slashdot.org/story/355802 And how exactly would this proposed policy change help with such a case? Please do not just mix in any random example of successful anti-abuse or anti-fraud action with "we need to spend more human lifetime on complicated processes that the bad guys can just easily pass". And, at least try the minimum amount of politeness in quoting according to local customs. (@chairs: can i propose a policy that makes it required policy to do proper e-mail quoting style, and otherwise people will permanently lose their Internet access? This would arguably only hit bad people and would be so much relief from this continuos abuse of my eyes!) Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

9 21

2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
by Alex de Joode 18 May '19

18 May '19

Ola, It's unclear to me what you are trying to accomplish with this policy: * ensure ripe members have a working (as in receiving mail) abuse email address; * ensure ripe members have a working abuse email address and process incoming mails; * ensure ripe members have a working abuse email address and read it; * ensure ripe members have a working abuse email address and act responsibly on notices. It seems you want to verify that a human reads the abuse box. However this will tell you nothing about how an organisation actually deals with abuse. So it will only burden ripe members to no avail. It is my belief ripe should stick to technical verification that a abuse email box exists and is able to receive mail. Ripe is not the internet sheriff :) Cheers, Alex -- IDGARA | Alex de Joode | +31651108221

5 8

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
by Gert Doering 18 May '19

18 May '19

Hi, On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 10:56:19AM +0000, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > I am sorry but where did I say close down all LIRs? You wanted an alternative proposal. I did one. Close down all LIRs = all abuse is stopped. You find that silly? Yes, it is. You can draw the conclusions yourself, hopefully. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

3 2

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
by Suresh Ramasubramanian 17 May '19

17 May '19

Yes it is. About the sixth offlist reply I've got from you. And yes this is a top post. Is all the "internet policing" this group is capable of solely restricted to attempted enforcement of usenet era message conventions? --srs ________________________________ From: Bengt Gördén <bengan(a)resilans.se> Sent: Friday, May 17, 2019 5:51 PM To: Suresh Ramasubramanian Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox") top post -- Bengt Gördén Resilans AB

2 1

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
by Suresh Ramasubramanian 17 May '19

17 May '19

That meeting back in December 2010 when a number of wg chairs and such all just coincidentally happened to be in the room during aob and overtime solely to propose that Richard Cox be removed as co chair of the wg sort of convinced me even back then that the answer is actually yes. --srs ________________________________ From: Bengt Gördén <bengan(a)resilans.se> Sent: Friday, May 17, 2019 6:50 PM To: Suresh Ramasubramanian Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox") no -- Bengt Gördén Resilans AB

1 0

Posting Styles (Was: RE: 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox") )
by Brian Nisbet 17 May '19

17 May '19

Gert, > -----Original Message----- > From: Gert Doering <gert(a)space.net> > Sent: Friday 17 May 2019 11:15 > To: Brian Nisbet <brian.nisbet(a)heanet.ie> > Cc: Gert Doering <gert(a)space.net>; Suresh Ramasubramanian > <ops.lists(a)gmail.com>; anti-abuse-wg(a)ripe.net > Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of > "abuse-mailbox") > > Hi, > > On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 10:08:24AM +0000, Brian Nisbet wrote: > > > And, at least try the minimum amount of politeness in quoting > > > according to local customs. > > > > Can we please let this particular one go? > > No. We manage to do this on the APWG list just fine. Great. I mean, I can find a few incidents of top posting on APWG, but maybe they all get a polite mail from you and never do it again? Neither I nor the other Co-Chairs have any wish to impose such style guides on AAWG. > It can be done if people *care*. And this caring is a matter of basic politness, > "if you enter a discussion, you follow style of the previous speakers". > > If the AAWG list is "we have no interest in politness towards people who > actually have to read what others write, and try to make sense out of > discussions with quoting", I will no longer *read* what is written here, > because it takes too much valuable lifetime. You're extrapolating in a very wrong way here. We have great interest in politeness and clear communication. But I'm also realistic enough to realise that I'm not going to stop people from posting if they don't follow a particular style. This is an open mailing list with lots of different people on it. Honestly, I was all for "inline only" back in the day, but I've made my peace with reality on this one. It is a great pity that you decide not to read conversations I still believe are fairly easy to comprehend. > Isn't this the place where we discuss about (very complicated) rules wrt e- > mail abuse handling verifcation? And we're not able to agree on a basic set > of rules for useful e-mail discussions? Opinions will vary, consensus will not be reached. There are hills I will die on, this is not one of them. If it's one you will die on, then that will be a great loss to the working group as your wisdom and experience are greatly appreciated. Maybe we could honestly, pause this discussion here and take it up in person in Reykjavik as I do feel that might be more productive. Thanks, Brian (With a bit more of his Co-Chair hat on, but even so) Brian Nisbet Service Operations Manager HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network 1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland +35316609040 brian.nisbet(a)heanet.ie www.heanet.ie Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

1 0

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
by Gert Doering 17 May '19

17 May '19

Hi, On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 10:37:13AM +0000, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Anything at all that gets used as a lever to deregister such an LIR and reclaim it's IPs will be a public service. If you have any other policy proposal that does this adequately I'm all ears. Till then faute de mieux.. Let's just close down all LIRs. It will do away with all abuse coming from LIRs. No? That's about the level of "why would this proposal help" that you are argueing on. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

2 1

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
by Gert Doering 17 May '19

17 May '19

Hi, On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 10:24:51AM +0000, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > With several countries in the RIPE region that have a major crime and corruption problem, no extradition or mlat treaties with the US or Europe and some that have used internet crime as a method of waging war in the past, it is the very last assumption you must base your policies on, let alone mailing list arguments. And this proposal helps with this "major crime and corruption problem" in exactly *which* way? Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

2 1

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")
by Gert Doering 17 May '19

17 May '19

Hi, On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 10:08:24AM +0000, Brian Nisbet wrote: > > And, at least try the minimum amount of politeness in quoting according to > > local customs. > > Can we please let this particular one go? No. We manage to do this on the APWG list just fine. It can be done if people *care*. And this caring is a matter of basic politness, "if you enter a discussion, you follow style of the previous speakers". If the AAWG list is "we have no interest in politness towards people who actually have to read what others write, and try to make sense out of discussions with quoting", I will no longer *read* what is written here, because it takes too much valuable lifetime. Isn't this the place where we discuss about (very complicated) rules wrt e-mail abuse handling verifcation? And we're not able to agree on a basic set of rules for useful e-mail discussions? Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

1 0

Agenda Update - Anti-Abuse WG Session @ RIPE78
by Brian Nisbet 16 May '19

16 May '19

Colleagues, Here is the latest agenda for the AA-WG Session, taking place in the Main Room at 09:00 GMT on Thursday 23rd May. Remote participation will be available, all of the details on ripe78.ripe.net A. Administrative Matters * Welcome * Scribe, Jabber, Stenography * Microphone Etiquette * Approve Minutes from RIPE 77 * Finalise agenda B. Update * B1. Recent List Discussion C. Policies - *C.1. RIPE NCC Update on 2017-02, Angela Dall'Ara - RIPE NCC *C.2. Policy Proposal 2019-03 - BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation, Carlos Friacas, FCT | FCCN & Jordi Palet Martinez, The IPv6 Company *C.3. Policy Proposal 2019-04 - Validation of "abuse-mailbox", Jordi Palet Martinez, The IPv6 Company D. Interactions - E. Presentation - * E1. The Curious Case of Fake UK LIRs - Gaith Taha * E2. Domain Abuse Activity Reporting - Samaneh Tajalizadehkhoob X. A.O.B. Z. Agenda for RIPE 79 Brian Nisbet Service Operations Manager HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network 1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland +35316609040 brian.nisbet(a)heanet.ie www.heanet.ie Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

1 0