As I read the proposal cutting off bogus LIRs seems to be the goal rather than cutting off a legitimate but careless player. There seem to be quite a few such given the coming wg meeting has a preso on just this topic. --srs ________________________________ From: anti-abuse-wg <anti-abuse-wg-bounces@ripe.net> on behalf of Carlos Friaças via anti-abuse-wg <anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net> Sent: Friday, May 17, 2019 3:08 PM To: Nick Hilliard Cc: Shane Kerr; anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Legality of proposal (apologies) On Fri, 17 May 2019, Nick Hilliard wrote:
Shane Kerr wrote on 17/05/2019 08:45:
All I can say is that the law is stupid then, and it SHOULD allow the proposed policy. ?
fundamentally, it shouldn't. Proportionality is a cornerstone of most legal systems - if you don't have proportionality, you end up with tyranny. The idea of threatening to cut off a LIR because they haven't updated an abuse contact is completely disproportionate to the scale of the policy infraction.
Hi, It's probably not "haven't updated" but instead "haven't created". Ideally this would also cover cases where company X deliberately inserts an e-mail address from someone which has nothing to do with the numbering resource... at least the legitimate owner of such mailbox should be able to resort to someone (hopefully not a court!) to have that corrected in the registry....... We had that with our postal address from an ARIN member some years ago. :/ Carlos
Nick