Hi Alex,
The intent of this policy is to ensure that the validation process is useful, and that means ensuring that the inbox is working, real (not from somebody else), monitored for abuse reports (automatically is ok if it really works, but there must be a way for human participation), and that those that send abuse reports don’t need to use a different form for every possible LIR in the world, which is not viable (unless there is a common standard for that – work in parallel but may take years).
A responsible organization will deal with abuse reports, and having a working abuse-c is part of it, otherwise people can’t report abuse cases. If abuse cases are ignored you escalate to the NCC or courts, or whatever, that’s another layer.
Regards,
Jordi
El 16/5/19 22:42, "anti-abuse-wg en nombre de Alex de Joode" <anti-abuse-wg-bounces@ripe.net en nombre de alex@idgara.nl> escribió:
Ola,
It's unclear to me what you are trying to accomplish with this policy:
1. ensure ripe members have a working (as in receiving mail) abuse email address;
2. ensure ripe members have a working abuse email address and process incoming mails;
3. ensure ripe members have a working abuse email address and read it;
4. ensure ripe members have a working abuse email address and act responsibly on notices.
It seems you want to verify that a human reads the abuse box. However this will tell you nothing about how an organisation actually deals with abuse. So it will only burden ripe members to no avail.
It is my belief ripe should stick to technical verification that a abuse email box exists and is able to receive mail. Ripe is not the internet sheriff :)
Cheers,
Alex
--
IDGARA | Alex de Joode | +31651108221