On 23/03/2019 13:31, Nick Hilliard wrote:
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via anti-abuse-wg wrote on 22/03/2019 22:55:
The legal bindings of the NCC already have that for those that don’t follow existing policies, don’t pay bills, etc. So, the proposal is adding in the table a policy for confirming what is a hijack according to the community consensus. Same way we did for how we distribute resources, do transfers, etc.
Hi Jordi,
couple of things:
1. it's not the job of the RIPE NCC to make up for a short-fall of civil legislation in this area, no matter how distasteful we might find the consequences of this; Purity of concept will result in massive gov't intervention since we will have shown that we don't know how to self-regulate. The voices are already there: https://hackernoon.com/why-the-internet-must-be-regulated-9d65031e7491 If you have an alternative solution, not even a better one, please suggest it.
Regards, Hank