Hi, On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 06:29:32AM +0200, ac wrote:
Folks, the process we have in the RIPE region for abuse contact validation is the result of a *consensus based process* that happend *in this working group*. Before you all argue for "we need to have more paperwork!" please take a step back and explain a) what is wrong with the current validation process, and b) why this proposal would improve this. Gert Doering -- NetMaster
because, IRL (in real life) things do not remain "static"
This is why we do (already!) verify abuse-c: reachability today. In a lightweight process that came out as consensus out of this very WG. [..]
your very forceful and multiple emails arguing very hard against and all your emails, attacking each and every +1 simply serves to illustrate that you really want to enforce your opinion on the group in this regard.
So, again, I ask: Why not propose to remove the abuse contact resource completely? Is this where you are going with your very strong and continuing and ongoing objections?
No. Abuse-contacts are useful. We do validate them today for technical reachability. This is fully sufficient to notice technical brokenness. It is not sufficient to enforce actual abuse *handling*, but neither is the proposed policy change. Do not put words in my mouth, I'm perfectly able to do that myself. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279