Sascha, Thank you for your input. Could you, during this phase, be a little clearer in regards to your reasons for objection. This is really a question for everyone contributing. For instance, what about the suggested implementation is onerous or oppressive? Thanks, Brian Co-Chair, RIPE AA-wG Brian Nisbet Network 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
-----Original Message----- From: anti-abuse-wg <anti-abuse-wg-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Sascha Luck [ml] Sent: Thursday 15 March 2018 17:04 To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Decision on Proposal 2017-02
On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 03:33:42PM +0100, Sander Steffann wrote:
This proposal is a first step to catch low hanging fruit. Yes: there are many things that can (should) be improved, but getting consensus on these controversial topics is difficult. So the proposers are taking it one step at a time. Based on the discussion on this mailing list those steps apparently have to be very small, but at least there is the possibility of movement :)
Correctly and perfectly summarised. A textbook example of early-stage frog- boiling. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog
The road to oppressive and onerous regulation is taken a small step at a time in the 21st century and that's why it is important to resist such attempts NOW while it is possible to do so without great personal sacrifice.
For the avoidance of doubt, the above constitutes (continuing) opposition to 2017-02.
rgds, Sascha Luck