Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 and over-reach
Colleagues, I want to comment on something below...
-----Original Message----- From: anti-abuse-wg <anti-abuse-wg-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of ac Sent: Saturday 23 March 2019 08:54
So, anyway, as 2019-03 deals with hijacking, this entire over reach argument is factually not relevant at all
and, more so: 2019-03 not proceeding would be counter to the ethical administration of resources, a dereliction of responsibility and a breach of trust implied in any such administration (as well as administrative authority)
A core part of the policy process in the RIPE Community is that nothing is set in stone. A policy which is rejected one day may be accepted another, or something which is put in place may be changed or altered when new information comes to light. This is all part of the PDP. *If* 2019-03 does not reach consensus it in no way implies the RIPE Community does not care about BGP hijacking (community pushes like MANRS and general work on RPKI says otherwise), all it says is that this proposal was not deemed to be the right way to go about it. Thanks, Brian Co-Chair, RIPE AAWG 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@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270
On Mon, 25 Mar 2019 09:29:47 +0000 Brian Nisbet <brian.nisbet@heanet.ie> wrote:
and, more so: 2019-03 not proceeding would be counter to the ethical administration of resources, a dereliction of responsibility and a breach of trust implied in any such administration (as well as administrative authority) A core part of the policy process in the RIPE Community is that nothing is set in stone. A policy which is rejected one day may be accepted another, or something which is put in place may be changed or altered when new information comes to light. This is all part of the PDP. *If* 2019-03 does not reach consensus it in no way implies the RIPE Community does not care about BGP hijacking (community pushes like MANRS and general work on RPKI says otherwise), all it says is that this proposal was not deemed to be the right way to go about it.
the point was not that arguments against 2019-03 means that the PDP is flawed or that anyone in opposition does not care about BGP hijacking, but that those in strong opposition to the exercise of administrative authority should understand (or at least be aware), that there is a very powerful responsibility to do so (to apply administrative authority), in the first place. so, claiming over-reach, should address exactly that (an imbalance in the potential exercise of administrative authority) - and not simply present the easy "chicken little" type argument against any such exercise at all. I frequently read someone saying "RIPE is not the Internet Police" (even I have said that a few times myself) but the hard truth is that any RIR has a duty to exercise administrative authority. Finding the balance where this duty is an over-reach, as per the subject line of this hijacked thread, is an important discussion that I believe this wg should have sometime as this relates directly to abuse also... and, similarly, arguing that because Afrinic etc does not do this or does not do that, is hardly any great argument either, many interesting things, angles and points in these 2019-03 discussions and threads :) Andre
participants (2)
-
ac -
Brian Nisbet