They had a fiduciary duty not to hand out whole /14s of v4 space to snowshoe spammers set up as eastern european LIRs not too long back
They would now as well if such duty wasn't abdicated each time
The duty doesn't magically go away of course even if it is abdicated and denied
From: anti-abuse-wg <anti-abuse-wg-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
Sent: Friday, April 19, 2019 8:16 PM
To: Carlos Friaças
Cc: Gert Doering; anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation)
Carlos Friaças via anti-abuse-wg wrote on 19/04/2019 15:03:
> Would you find reasonable to have the rule/policy in place say for 2 or
> 3 years, and then evaluate its impact/efectiveness...?
No. In principle, the proposal is completely broken, antithetical to
the RIPE NCC's obligations of being an address registry and Randy was
right to point out that it is a proposal for a kangaroo court. We don't
need to make the mistake of testing it out to make sure.
It will not have any material impact on hijacking; there are better ways
of handling hijacking and the proposal will have a wide variety of
serious but unintended side effects, some of which have been raised on
this mailing list. And it's unimplementable - the board of the RIPE NCC
would have a fiduciary duty to refuse to implement it.
Nick