Thank you so much for taking the time to send me so much information about
the potential of governments. As a layman in this subject, this information
helped me better to assess the real effects of a policy proposal anti-shutdown
which provides for punishment.
Sorry for not posting your text which were banned by the RIPE censors. It
is an old habit of the colonizing lords. One day they will learn to live with
the contradictory, by hook or by crook.
Although I do not agree with your truth about spam, I must respect the way
you expose your truth without hypocrisy, without subterfuge, with honesty. I can
not say the same about your detractors in this group.
Send
anti-abuse-wg mailing list submissions to
anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
To
subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web,
visit
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg
or, via email,
send a message with subject or body 'help'
to
anti-abuse-wg-request@ripe.net
You can reach the person managing
the list at
anti-abuse-wg-owner@ripe.net
When replying, please edit
your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of anti-abuse-wg
digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. About introduction
of punishments in AFRINIC's policy
(Marilson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message:
1
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2017 19:37:18 -0300
From: "Marilson"
<marilson.mapa@gmail.com>
To:
<anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>
Subject: [anti-abuse-wg] About introduction of
punishments in
AFRINIC's policy
Message-ID:
<CC24BC5A92B14DF59394BDA9F957A7AE@xPC>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Abuse: shut down Internet access for political
reasons
Abuse authorship: autocratic governments
Objective:
punishment
The RIPE policy list commented and it is under discussion on
AFRINIC a policy proposal anti-shutdown which provides for
punishment.
https://afrinic.net/en/community/policy-development/policy-proposals/2061-anti-shutdown-01
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/04/12/no_ip_addresses_for_countries/
On
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List, a member commented:
>Doesn't seem
like the most workable policy to my novice eyes.
>Is it really
a good idea to convert RIRs into the internet police?
>if we
think it is a good idea, who decides what's a proper case for
implementation?
That is what I wrote there:
To my novice eyes, but
tired and disappointed, I find it rather appropriate that the entity responsible
for the management and allocation of IP address blocks adopt punitive measures
against those who interfere in the free internet or in the inappropriate use of
those services.
Who decides? The evidence. And the Internet community
seems to be the only one capable of putting punitive measures into
practice.
No matter who we are or what we do, commitment to democracy
should always be part of our activities.
The owners of these resources is
the population of the planet. RIRs manage these resources on behalf of this
population and should effectively manage without omitting and transferring that
responsibility to governments or to their ISP customers.
I say this
because, just as there are autocratic governments, there are bad ISPs who
arrogantly refuse to punish clients with illicit activities even in the face of
evidence. And in the face of these bad providers, governments, without
exception, turn a blind eye. They are more concerned about employment within
their territory even at the expense of the population being the victim of
spammers and scammers.
This situation explains and does not justify the
420 billion spam and scam per day (Cisco).
Never so few done so much harm
to so many.
No more shutdowns.
No more denying access to information
and knowledge.
No more bad ISPs.
Even with
Trump!
Marilson
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML
attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20170415/2ee680e9/attachment-0001.html>
End
of anti-abuse-wg Digest, Vol 65, Issue
2
********************************************