Hi All, I'm not sure about the 6 month period (vs. 12 months), and probably some details can be improved in further versions, but i do support this proposal, which is clearly in the path of "anti-abuse". My team has nearly sent out 6000 abuse reports (only about intrusion attempts and brute force attacks) since Jan 1st this year. I've just checked, and only 2.5% bounced. 2018's bounces were around 4.5%. Maybe when we start to send out (automated) abuse reports about spam, the percentage will increase. We also send messages, globally, so solving the issue only in RIPEland will have limited impact. I've read this is already under implementation in another region, and proposed in the remaining 3 -- great! I also think some reference to the ARC (Assisted Registry Check) could be included in the proposal, and could work as a primary step well before going into other actions which can carry more impact. Regards, Carlos On Thu, 16 May 2019, Marco Schmidt wrote:
Dear colleagues,
A new RIPE Policy proposal, 2019-04, "Validation of "abuse-mailbox"", is now available for discussion.
This proposal aims to have the RIPE NCC validate "abuse-c:" information more often, and introduces a new validation process that requires manual input from resource holders.
You can find the full proposal at: https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2019-04
As per the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP), the purpose of this four-week Discussion Phase is to discuss the proposal and provide feedback to the proposer.
At the end of the Discussion Phase, the proposer, with the agreement of the Anti-Abuse Working Group Chairs, decides how to proceed with the proposal.
We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to <anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net> before 14 June 2019.
Kind regards,
Marco Schmidt Policy Officer RIPE NCC
Sent via RIPE Forum -- https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum