In message
<CD95F06AD1A1624FB3E613B62842F4D30236249784@SRV-MAIL10-MB1.inteco.local>,
=?utf-8?B?w4FuZ2VsIEdvbnrDoWxleiBCZXJkYXNjbw==?= <angel.gonza...@incibe.es>
wrote:
>Well, I do see the value of an option (a magic email value?) meaning "this
>entity supports the use of its network for abusive purposes and will take no
>action on any abuse report".
>
>That would save time for everyone involved, and would allow to easily block
>those networks from accesing ours!
These are pretty much my sentiments exactly.
The only questions remaining are:
1) Should there just be a simple yes/no one-bit flag published for
each resource holder, or would a scale and a range of possible
"rating" values be more useful?
2) How shall the "ratings" be computed and by whom?
I have provided my personal opinions on both of these points in my
prior posting.
Regards,
rfg
