Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation)

[Brian Nisbet]

Thanks Marco,

Discussion on the proposal has already started, which is great. I would remind 
all of those interested in participating to ensure they discuss the proposal as 
written and obviously to be polite in all things.

Finally, if you wish to support the proposal, please say so clearly, but 
remember, this isn't a vote, this is a process to establish if consensus exists 
to move the proposal forward.

Similarly if you disagree with the proposal, please say so clearly and 
preferably with details on your objections so they can be discussed by the 
proposer or incorporated to make a future version of the proposal better.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AAWG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

> -Original Message-
> From: anti-abuse-wg  On Behalf Of
> Marco Schmidt
> Sent: Tuesday 19 March 2019 12:41
> To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
> Subject: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a RIPE
> Policy Violation)
> 
> Dear colleagues,
> 
> A new RIPE Policy proposal, 2019-03, "BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy 
> Violation",
> is now available for discussion.
> 
> The goal of this proposal is to define that BGP hijacking is not accepted as
> normal practice within the RIPE NCC service region.
> 
> You can find the full proposal at:
> https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2019-03
> 
> As per the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP), the purpose of this four-
> week Discussion Phase is to discuss the proposal and provide feedback to the
> proposer.
> 
> At the end of the Discussion Phase, the proposers, with the agreement of
> the Anti-Abuse WG co-chairs, decide how to proceed with the proposal.
> 
> We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to  abuse...@ripe.net> before 17 April 2019.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Marco Schmidt
> Policy Officer
> RIPE NCC
> 
> Sent via RIPE Forum -- https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation)

[Brian Nisbet]

Jordi,

> -Original Message-
> From: anti-abuse-wg  On Behalf Of


> I can figure several possible ways to avoid that.
> 1) Contractual (not sure if this can be done in a policy) changes to indicate
> than in case of a policy violation, the account becomes frozen immediately,
> until actions to close the account are completed.
> 2) A modification to the transfers policy that indicates that no transfers can
> be initiated if the any of the parties are involved in an investigation for 
> policy
> violation.
> 3) A specific policy about implications of policy violations.
> 
> If instead of that we want explicit text about that in this policy proposal, 
> that
> means possibly a way for slowing down the process, which at the time being
> it seems to me there is a major agreement of favor of doing something.
> Furthermore, having explicit text here means that other policy violations
> need to have their own way, and I think we must have a single path for
> resolving those issues, not one for each possible policy violation case.
> 
> Does that make sense ?
> 
> Can we agree that it will be better to have this discussion in a separate
> thread/policy proposal, in order to avoid this to be a show-stopper for this
> policy proposal?
> 
> Would the chairs allow that thread in this list or suggest an alternative WG 
> for
> a possible policy proposal?

Good question, but I think that any policy dealing with changing how the NCC 
should react to policy violations will be... complex. I also don't think AA-WG 
is the right place for such a general policy. So if you, as the author, don't 
wish to insert it into your policy (and I can understand your reasoning fully), 
then I think  a separate policy, likely pointed towards somewhere like NCC 
Services would be more apt.

I would caution that such things are likely to have a large interaction 
with/involvement of the NCC Membership, where such discussions have been very 
divided in the past. I think you and many other people are aware of this, but I 
just wanted to flag it.

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation)

[Brian Nisbet]

Folks,

We were doing so well!

There is a difference between expressing opposition to the statements and the 
manner of doing so. I've called this out before, but please remember that a) 
this is all text, a medium infamous for being awful at nuance and conveying 
meaning and b) there are members on the list from many places and cultures and 
we should all be very considered in our reactions.

I will admit, I do not interpret Sascha's remark as calling Hank a liar, but 
there are reasons for that of language and context as well. So right now, I 
will leave the points above where they are and ask everyone to choose their 
words carefully.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AAWG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

From: Suresh Ramasubramanian 
Sent: Wednesday 20 March 2019 16:45
To: Sascha Luck [ml] ; Hank Nussbacher 
Cc: Ricardo Patara ; anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net; Brian Nisbet 

Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a 
RIPE Policy Violation)

+ Brian - how appropriate is it to call other posters liars like this?

--srs

From: anti-abuse-wg 
mailto:anti-abuse-wg-boun...@ripe.net>> on 
behalf of Sascha Luck [ml] mailto:a...@c4inet.net>>
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2019 8:42 PM
To: Hank Nussbacher
Cc: Ricardo Patara; anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net<mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a 
RIPE Policy Violation)

>If you are a victim (someone has abused your network), then just prove
>it and the policy won't apply and the hivemind will even assist you in
>cleaning your router.

LOL, two of the oldest lies in history neatly rolled into one
statement:

"If you have done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear" and
"I'm from $agency, I'm here to help you"

rgds,
Sascha Luck


>
>Regards,
>-Hank
>
>>On this line of one ISP trying to make damage to other.
>>
>>One might abuse a vulnerable router (thousand out there), create a
>>tunnel to it and announce hijacked blocks originated from victims
>>ASN.
>>
>>Both, victim ASN and vulnerable router owner, would be damaged and
>>no traces of criminal.
>>How could they defend themselves to the so called group of experts?
>>
>>And things in this line had happened already.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>On 20/03/2019 07:46, furio ercolessi wrote:
>>>On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 11:01:30AM +0300, Andrey Korolyov wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>And when everything is made clear, if a report is filed
>>>>>against AS1, AS1's
>>>>>holder might have a problem, so i see a strong reason for not even trying
>>>>>:-)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>Out of interest, take an AS1 with single malicious upstream AS2,
>>>>what stops
>>>>AS2 to pretend that AS1 has made bogus announcements and make them for its
>>>>own purposes? This situation looks pretty real without RPKI or other
>>>>advertisement strengthening methods, as I could see. How experts are
>>>>supposed to behave in this situation?
>>>
>>>This has been seen many times, even chain situations like
>>>
>>> - AS X
>>> \
>>> AS 3 - AS 2 - AS 1
>>> /
>>> - AS Y
>>>
>>>where X and Y are legitimate ISPs, while {1,2,3} is basically a
>>>single rogue
>>>entity - or a set of rogue entities closely working together with a common
>>>criminal goal.
>>>
>>>In such a setup, AS 1 should be considered as the most
>>>"throw-away" resource,
>>>while AS 3 would play the "customer of customer, not my business" role,
>>>and AS 2 would play the "i notified my customer and will disconnect them
>>>if they continue" role. When AS 1 is burnt, a new one is made - with
>>>new people as contacts, new IP addresses, etc, so that no obvious
>>>correlation
>>>can be made. Most of the bad guys infrastructure is in AS 3 and
>>>that remains
>>>pretty stable because their bad nature can not be easily demonstrated.
>>>
>>>Whatever set of rules is made against hijacking, it should be assumed that
>>>these groups will do everything to get around those rules, and many AS's
>>>can be used to this end. Since there is no shortage of AS numbers, I
>>>assume that anybody can get one easily so they can change them as if they
>>>were underwear.
>>>
>>>And yes, unallocated AS's in the AS 1 position, announcing unallocated IPs,
>>>have also been seen. Those are even easier to get :-)
>>>
>>>So the ideal scheme to counteract BGP hijacking should be able to climb up
>>>the BGP tree in some way, until "real" ISPs are reached.
>>>
>>>Nice discussion!
>>>
>>>furio ercolessi
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation)

[Brian Nisbet]

Thanks Gert, the advantage of having someone very knowledgeable and willing to 
explain who is in a timezone an hour ahead of me!

One thing I will add, this policy will almost certainly be on the agenda for 
our session at RIPE78, because real life discussion or information is useful, 
but as Gert clearly points out, the decision will be made on the mailing list 
in the timelines state.

The Discussion Phase lasts until the 17th of April.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AAWG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

> -Original Message-
> From: Gert Doering 
> Sent: Thursday 21 March 2019 07:43
> To: Suresh Ramasubramanian 
> Cc: Gert Doering ; Sascha Luck [ml] ;
> Brian Nisbet ; Ricardo Patara
> ; anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
> Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a
> RIPE Policy Violation)
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 07:38:34AM +, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> > Ah that way. Then -
> >
> > Do we have rough consensus? If not at what point is it reached?
> 
> Now this is left to the AA WG chairs to decide :-)
> 
> As per the RIPE PDP, we're in "discussion phase", which is run to the end
> date Marco announced (too lazy to look it up).  Then, the proposers decide
> together with the relevant WG chairs if they think it makes sense to go ahead
> (it does not have to have consensus, but should have some amount of
> support, and no counter arguments that are compelling enough to outright
> kill the proposal).
> 
> If yes, the RIPE NCC does the Impact Analysis, and the proposal moves to
> review phase.
> 
> At the end of the review phase, the WG chairs determine rough consensus.
> 
> Here's a nice video about the phases
> 
>https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies
> 
> plus the link to the formal document
> 
>https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-710
> 
> 
> Gert Doering
> -- NetMaster
> --
> have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
> 
> SpaceNet AG  Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
> Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
> D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
> Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation)

[Brian Nisbet]

> -Original Message-
> From: anti-abuse-wg  On Behalf Of
> Ronald F. Guilmette
> Sent: Thursday 21 March 2019 22:27
> To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
> Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a
> RIPE Policy Violation)
> 
> 
> In message ,
> Suresh Ramasubramanian  wrote:
> 
> >Ah good. So a few more days of this "sascha opposes it" while others
> >chime in +1s. Fine then .. thanks for enlightening me.
> 
> This may sound odd, coming from me, but I say let him speak his mind until
> he feels that he has done so to the full.  The proposal only came forth a mere
> few days ago, and there is no compelling reason to rush to judgement.
> Let everyone express themselves and their viewpoints until there is no more
> to be said that isn't unambiguously repetitive.  You would hope for the same
> courtesy if and when you were esposing an unpopular or minority view.

Thank you for your comments, Ronald!

To be clear, there's quite a bit of the Discussion Phase left to run and there 
will hopefully be plenty more discussion during that phase! 

As you're all aware, RIPE Policies are both important and far reaching. We, as 
a community, should never rush to judgement, either way and there have been 
many occasions when comments introduced late in policy discussion have had 
important effects on the final policies and decisions.

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AAWG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation)

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

> -Original Message-
> From: anti-abuse-wg  On Behalf Of
> Ronald F. Guilmette
> Sent: Friday 22 March 2019 21:43
>
>
> A vote in favor of the proposal is in fact a vote in favor of *true* 
> neutrality
> and impartiality and *against* the unilateral decisions and actions of
> individual actors which themselves have personalized motives that are often
> both unseen and also often more than a little suspect.

To clarify, the discussion on this proposal is a discussion, not a vote. When 
judging consensus the Co-Chairs will look at the points made during the 
discussion, not count the +1s. Of course it is useful to get a feeling for 
general agreement, so simple statements of support or dissent are very useful, 
but they are not the core of the thing.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AAWG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation)

[Brian Nisbet]

> -Original Message-
> From: anti-abuse-wg  On Behalf Of
> Ronald F. Guilmette
> Sent: Saturday 23 March 2019 23:47 
> 
> In message  internet.com>,
> Erik Bais  wrote:
> 
> >So if we want the Executive board to do something like this, this needs
> >to go to the GM.
> 
> I have no reason to doubt that.
> 
> It is still, I believe,. within the prerogative of this WG to pass a non- 
> binding
> resolution -recommending- that the GM take up the matter, and that it
> accept the proposal.  Would you agree?
> 
> I ask the Chair for clarification.

The WG can do all sorts of things. 😊 Should this proposal reach consensus, and 
remember that part of that process includes an impact assessment report from 
the NCC, there will have to be extensive discussions on how it might be 
approached and implemented. Non-binding resolutions are tricky things at the 
best of times. 

> >I would also like it if you would refrain from making ANY comments
> >about the WWII and apologize to the people on the list.
> 
> My apologies.  I confess that I utterly negelected to consider the possibility
> that some in Europe might be extremely sensitive about a reference to a
> well-documented historical event which, I hoped, everyone might at least be
> familiar with, even if it only occurred in a time before even most of your
> parents were born.

It is generally best to avoid reference to avoid references to any such acts of 
reprehensible evil when making comparisons, whether they are within living 
memory or not. 

This list is not a good place to get into who did what, to whom, when. I can 
summon many examples of things that one group might feel is a fine thing to 
say, while another may, completely justifiably, be greatly upset by a 
reference. If comparisons or proofs, to say that a fact is a fact, then maybe 
science might be a safer port.

Thanks all,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AAWG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 and over-reach

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

I want to comment on something below...

> -Original Message-
> From: anti-abuse-wg  On Behalf Of ac
> Sent: Saturday 23 March 2019 08:54
> 
> So, anyway, as 2019-03 deals with hijacking, this entire over reach argument
> is factually not relevant at all
> 
> and, more so: 2019-03 not proceeding would be counter to the ethical
> administration of resources, a dereliction of responsibility and a breach of
> trust implied in any such administration (as well as administrative authority)

A core part of the policy process in the RIPE Community is that nothing is set 
in stone. A policy which is rejected one day may be accepted another, or 
something which is put in place may be changed or altered when new information 
comes to light. This is all part of the PDP.

*If* 2019-03 does not reach consensus it in no way implies the RIPE Community 
does not care about BGP hijacking (community pushes like MANRS and general work 
on RPKI says otherwise), all it says is that this proposal was not deemed to be 
the right way to go about it.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AAWG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 and over-reach

[Brian Nisbet]

Sascha, all,

> -Original Message-
> From: Sascha Luck [ml] 
> Sent: Monday 25 March 2019 12:24
>
> I therefore argue that it is maybe time to have a discussion on what exactly
> RIPE and the NCC should be and what, if any, limits on their administrative
> power there should be.
> I hope, though, that everyone can at least agree that *this* is
> *not* the forum for that discussion.

To confirm, the Anti-Abuse WG is absolutely not the right forum for that 
discussion.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Proposal 2019-03 BGP Hijacking

[Brian Nisbet]

Thank you, yes, we did before. 😊

If what I wrote on the 25th of March is unclear, please let me know. To repeat, 
messages of support are useful and indicative, but they do not carry an 
argument.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

From: anti-abuse-wg  On Behalf Of Töma 
Gavrichenkov
Sent: Saturday 30 March 2019 10:08
To: Carlos Friaças 
Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Proposal 2019-03 BGP Hijacking

On Sat, Mar 30, 2019, 10:23 AM Carlos Friaças via anti-abuse-wg 
mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>> wrote:
Do supporters need to specify which parts of the proposal's text are more
meaningful for them?

Perhaps one of the Chairs can shed some light.

They in fact have done that before. To quote:

---- start ----

From: Brian Nisbet mailto:brian.nis...@heanet.ie>>
Date: Mon, Mar 25, 2019, 10:12 AM
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is a 
RIPE Policy Violation)

[..] To clarify, the discussion on this proposal is a discussion, not a vote. 
When judging consensus the Co-Chairs will look at the points made during the 
discussion, not count the +1s. Of course it is useful to get a feeling for 
general agreement, so simple statements of support or dissent are very useful, 
but they are not the core of the thing.

 end 

--
Töma

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] I support 2019-03

[Brian Nisbet]

Isabel, all,

Sorry that the emails are more than you expected. However emails are the core 
way in which the working group, and all RIPE working groups, work, so when 
there is a policy to discuss, they will increase in volume.

That said, you can either change to a daily digest or unsubscribe via the 
mailman interface here:

https://www.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/anti-abuse-wg/

You can also follow the discussion via the RIPE Forum:

https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum/

Regards,

Brian,
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Isabel 
Strijland 
Sent: Tuesday 2 April 2019 19:13
To: TRAILL Neville (RIC-US)
Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] I support 2019-03

How can I unsibscribe to this??? The e-mails are driving me crazy.

Von meinem iPhone gesendet

Am 02.04.2019 um 20:07 schrieb TRAILL Neville (RIC-US) 
mailto:neville.tra...@richemont.com>>:


Dear RIPE NCC



I support 2019-03.



Neville Traill
Cyber Specialist | Richemont North America, Inc.





3 Enterprise Drive | Shelton CT 06484 | United States
(tel) +12039256400 | (direct) +18177852548
(email) neville.tra...@richemont.com<mailto:neville.tra...@richemont.com>




© 2019 Richemont North America, Inc.. All Rights Reserved
The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential - please do 
not cross-post. This communication is intended for the use of the addressee(s) 
only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any 
review, reliance, disclosure, distribution or copying of this communication may 
be prohibited by law and might constitute a breach of confidence. If you have 
received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete 
it and all copies (including attachments) from your system.

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Astroturfing?

[Brian Nisbet]

Michele, All,

Just to confirm, there is no issue with individuals sending messages of support 
on a proposal to the mailing list. The Chairs consider them all as part of the 
process. However, as I also stated, this is not a vote, this is a discussion 
which may or may not lead to a consensus of the working group and community and 
anyone who is emailing the list, or encouraging others to do so, should be 
aware of that.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Michele 
Neylon - Blacknight 
Sent: Wednesday 3 April 2019 10:58
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: [anti-abuse-wg] Astroturfing?

All

Is someone encouraging astroturfing?

The number of either new or inactive members of this list who have posted one 
line messages in support of the recent policy discussion has reached insane 
levels

Regards

Michele

--
Mr Michele Neylon
Blacknight Solutions
Hosting, Colocation & Domains
https://www.blacknight.com/
https://blacknight.blog/
Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
Personal blog: https://michele.blog/
Some thoughts: https://ceo.hosting/
---
Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,R93 X265,Ireland  Company No.: 370845

[anti-abuse-wg] On +1s and Policy Awareness

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

Two (broad) things to address, while, of course, noting that I would ask you 
all to assume best intent in all of your fellow working group members. And to 
post as politely as possible yourself!

I have, repeatedly, pointed out that all of the emails are being read by the 
Co-Chairs and the RIPE PDO. Short messages of support or +1s are noted and 
considered, but this is not a vote. I think I've said that twice now, hopefully 
the third time will be enough. We have also read the opinions of people about 
this, however the original statement remains unchanged. If, at the appropriate 
points, anyone in the working group feels the Co-Chairs have erred in our 
decision regarding consensus, then there is an appeals process. 

RIPE 710 covers the whole PDP and section 4 specifically covers appeals - 
https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-710

On the general awareness of the policy, the announcement on 2019-03 was posted 
to the Policy Announce list and to Routing-WG in addition to here. It has also 
been raised in a few other locations. Given where we are right now in the 
initial Discussion Phase and the plans by the authors to produce a v2.0 of the 
document, I would strongly suggest (but note that it is not certain) that 
nothing will have been decided by RIPE 78, when even more people will become 
aware. If people choose not to join the mailing list nor use the RIPE Forum to 
participate, then there is little the AA-WG can do.

So please, especially given all the nice things people have said about the 
Co-Chairs, and thank you for that, can you trust that we are both seeing all of 
the messages and treating them as stated, and if you don't agree, there is a 
process by which you can express this, rather than all going back and forth 
again here.

You can also always contact the Co-Chairs directly on aa-wg-ch...@ripe.net

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG



Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] On +1s and Policy Awareness AND Astro... something...

[Brian Nisbet]

Newcomers are welcome. It's that simple. If newcomers do not feel welcome then 
it is up to the Co-Chairs and all members of the WG to improve that.

I know that saying something doesn't automatically make it so, and I know how 
intimidating some mail threads can be, but remember to make everyone welcome 
and to treat their words with good intent. It's on all of us.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AAWG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

> -Original Message-
> From: anti-abuse-wg  On Behalf Of
> Carlos Friaças via anti-abuse-wg
> Sent: Friday 5 April 2019 08:28
> To: Sascha Luck [ml] 
> Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
> Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] On +1s and Policy Awareness AND Astro...
> something...
> 
> 
> Hi, Sascha, All,
> 
> Seriously? Newcomers welcomed?
> 
> It's just a matter of going back and re-read parts of the thread and some sub-
> threads...
> 
> Regards,
> Carlos
> 
> 
> On Thu, 4 Apr 2019, Sascha Luck [ml] wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 04:52:32PM +0100, CSIRT.UMINHO Marco Teixeira
> wrote:
> >> While I speak for myself, I might incur the risk of representing a
> >> lot of the so-called "Astroturfers?!". While some accuse (please
> >> don't take it personally, it's just clarification) the newcomers of
> >> being voiceless, I must say that I have been, with great effort,
> >> refraining from going into a long discourse on a list where I am new.
> >> That should not be understood as a sign of "spamming" a vetting
> >> process, but as a sign of respect for all of you, long-standing
> >> members of RIPE, guardians of our IP addresses, one of the building
> >> blocks of the Internet :-)
> >
> > I know of forums where "the n00b" is expected to shut up and listen,
> > but this is not one of them. At least I have never noticed that
> > newcomers weren't welcomed - and as I stated before, I personally
> > would like to see more and different voices here - and no, not just
> > those who agree with me although I hope some will...
> >
> > So don't be afraid to speak up if you've something to say!
> >
> >> As one last thought, again IMHO, I believe BGP Hijacking is one of
> >> the most pressing issues, menacing the Internet resiliency, and it
> >> must be dealt with. In the same manner, we apply AUP's to our users,
> >> it's RIPE responsibility, to clearly state, it is not acceptable, and
> >> it will have consequences... Raising the risk for companies is the
> >> only way we tip the balance of "Loss vs Earning", and hopefully
> >> eradicate bad actors, or hopefully even stopping them right at their
> business plans.
> >
> > 1) The RIPE NCC is not the provider of "AUP" for the entire Internet
> > or even the Internet of the Service Region. I understand that some
> > would *like* it to be, but that is not what the members are paying it
> > for. 2) If anyone needs to be "eradicated", I'd prefer that to be
> > determined by a judge and, preferably, a jury. NOT some neighbourhood
> > watch curtain-twitcher with the help of a monopoly service provider.
> >> This is why I support "2019-03 New Policy Proposal (BGP Hijacking is
> >> a RIPE Policy Violation)"
> >
> > and this is why I oppose it :)
> >
> > rgds,
> > SL
> >

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] On +1s and Policy Awareness AND Astro... something...

[Brian Nisbet]

Ronald,

> -Original Message-
> From: anti-abuse-wg  On Behalf Of
> Ronald F. Guilmette
> Sent: Friday 5 April 2019 20:57
> To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
> Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] On +1s and Policy Awareness AND Astro...
> something...
>
>
> >The debate as to what function the NCC should have can and should be
> >had. However, not here. This is something that I firmly believe the
> >paying membership AND NOBODY ELSE should decide.
> 
> I actually would agree with that last part, i.e. the part about having -only- 
> the
> dues-paying members decide.  I confess that I know virtually nothing about
> the mechanics of how this whole process is supposed to work, but it has
> been my assumption throughout that, yes, in fact, a proposal such as this -
> would- ultimately have to be approved by the dues-paying membership,
> acting as a whole body.  Are you asserting that a new rule such as 2019-03
> could be adopted WITHOUT the consent of the dues-paying members, acting
> as a whole?  If so, that's news to me!
> 
> I confess that I may have been incorrectly assuming that this proposal would
> be -reviewed- by the AAWG, and that at the end of this process, the
> -recommendation- of the AAWG would be passed on for final ratification to
> whatever body represents the whole of the dues-paying members... sort of
> like a U.S. congressional subcommittee can simply -recommend- something,
> after which it goes to the full committee, and then if -they- approve it, 
> then it
> finally gets voted on by the whole body (either the Senate or the House of
> Representatives).  If that's not the way this actually works in the case of 
> the
> RIPE AAWG, then I ask for either you or the chair to educate me about the
> mechanics of the actual adoption proccess for RIPE proposals (such as 2019-
> 03) because it sounds like you are saying that -just- the AAWG can act on its
> own and thus bind the whole of RIPE to some course of action.  If that's true,
> then it certainly would be unfair and un-democratic.

If this proposal reaches consensus after going through the RIPE Policy 
Development Process - https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies - then it 
becomes RIPE policy. The RIPE NCC are then tasked with implementing that 
policy. This is why we try to advertise the policy discussions so broadly 
(Policy Announce List, discussions at meetings, other forms of communication), 
because the process is the thing.

Now, should there be a dispute between the wishes of the membership and a 
policy, then that is a whole other thing and it is not my place to speculate on 
the outcome, but there is no step where the General Meeting is asked to vote on 
a policy, it's all done by consensus in the Working Groups. It is really wrong 
to describe this as a democracy, as I've said several times, this is not a vote.

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

[anti-abuse-wg] Anti-Abuse WG Draft RIPE 78 Agenda

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

Here is the draft agenda for RIPE 78. Our meeting will be taking place at 09:00 
GMT on Thursday 23rd May. If you have any additional items for the agenda, 
please contact aa-wg-ch...@ripe.net as soon as possible.

A. Administrative Matters

* Welcome
* Scribe, Jabber, Stenography
* Microphone Etiquette
* Approve Minutes from RIPE 77
* Finalise agenda

B. Update

* B1. Recent List Discussion

C. Policies -

 *C.1. RIPE NCC Update on 2017-02, Angela Dall'Ara - RIPE NCC
 *C.2. Policy Proposal 2019-03 - BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation, 
Carlos Friacas, FCT | FCCN & Jordi Palet Martinez, The IPv6 Company


D. Interactions -



E. Presentation -

* E1. The Curious Case of Fake UK LIRs - Gaith Taha


X. A.O.B.

Z. Agenda for RIPE 79

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

[anti-abuse-wg] Policy Proposal 2019-03 Update

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

The four week discussion phase for 2019-03 officially ended just over a week 
ago. Since then, while there has been further welcome discussion on list, the 
WG Co-Chairs have been discussing the next steps with the proposers and the NCC 
Policy Officer. We have reached the following conclusions.

2019-03 will now move into the Review Phase, with a new version of the policy 
coming to the list in the next couple of days. Along with this the NCC will 
start their Impact Analysis which they will share as soon as possible.

This does not imply any judgement regarding consensus or lack of consensus for 
2019-03, but the Co-Chairs feel it is the best way to both bring the new draft 
of the proposed policy to you all *and* obtain the vital information from the 
NCC their understanding of the policy and likely impact.

It is at the end of the Review Phase that a decision regarding consensus will 
be made.

As always, please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, AA-WG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] AS24940 Hetzner -- non-role contact wanted

[Brian Nisbet]

All,

This conversation is not in any way useful to the community at this point and 
it is definitely not in the spirit of the Code of Conduct.

The request was made in regards to a contact. The initial discussion was about 
whether Hetzner's processes were valid or not, that is fine.

However we've gone well past that and I would ask both of you to please step 
away from the conversation. This is not a question of who said what or the 
relative merits of same, it's a case of a thread that should please cease.

And I would caution everyone on the list to please, as always, consider their 
responses and whether they *need* to respond to any post here. And if you do 
need to respond, which you may well, that's great, but if you do, do so in a 
respectful manner.

Thank you,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

> -Original Message-
> From: anti-abuse-wg  On Behalf Of ac
> Sent: Thursday 25 April 2019 11:08
> To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
> Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] AS24940 Hetzner -- non-role contact wanted
> 
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 02:42:35 -0700
> "Ronald F. Guilmette"  wrote:
> > I have just been reviewing the RIPE Code of Conduct for mailing lists,
> > and specifically these sections:
> >
> >
> > https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/ripe-mailing-list-ripe-forum-cod
> > e-of-conduct
> >
> >   RIPE community members should not spam mailing lists, post
> > others' personal information, register multiple accounts to avoid
> > moderation or mislead participants, impersonate others, or make
> > threats. Overt marketing or promotional activities are discouraged.
> >
> >   Chairs are responsible for facilitating and moderating the RIPE
> >   community's discussions. At times they may direct an individual
> > to cease a certain type of behaviour. Chairs have the authority to
> >   moderate or ban disruptive community members if they decide this
> >   is necessary.
> >
> > I'd just like to ask you if you are in agreement with the above quoted
> 
> Yes, I am in complete agreement with the above.
> 
> That said, you, on the other hand are clearly not.
> 
> Whether I am wearing underwear or not hardly has anything to do with this
> abuse list and your discussing my underwear is also hardly proper.
> 
> And, you, requesting a non-role contact at Hetzner, is clearly an indication 
> of
> the bully you are.
> 
> That you are also an ignorant bully is now common cause.
> 
> Andre
> 

[anti-abuse-wg] Updated Agenda - RIPE AA-WG @ RIPE78

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

The first update to the draft agenda for our meeting in Reykjavik:

A. Administrative Matters

* Welcome
* Scribe, Jabber, Stenography
* Microphone Etiquette
* Approve Minutes from RIPE 77
* Finalise agenda

B. Update

* B1. Recent List Discussion

C. Policies -

 *C.1. RIPE NCC Update on 2017-02, Angela Dall'Ara - RIPE NCC
 *C.2. Policy Proposal 2019-03 - BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation, 
Carlos Friacas, FCT | FCCN & Jordi Palet Martinez, The IPv6 Company

D. Interactions -

E. Presentation -

* E1. The Curious Case of Fake UK LIRs - Gaith Taha
* E2. Domain Abuse Activity Reporting - Samaneh Tajalizadehkhoob


X. A.O.B.

Z. Agenda for RIPE 79

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Policy Proposal 2019-03 Update

[Brian Nisbet]

Randy,

> -Original Message-
> From: Randy Bush 
> Sent: Thursday 25 April 2019 19:32
> To: Brian Nisbet 
> Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
> Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Policy Proposal 2019-03 Update
> 
> > The four week discussion phase for 2019-03 officially ended just over
> > a week ago. Since then, while there has been further welcome
> > discussion on list, the WG Co-Chairs have been discussing the next
> > steps with the proposers and the NCC Policy Officer. We have reached
> > the following conclusions.
> >
> > 2019-03 will now move into the Review Phase, with a new version of the
> > policy coming to the list in the next couple of days. Along with this
> > the NCC will start their Impact Analysis which they will share as soon
> > as possible.
> >
> > This does not imply any judgement regarding consensus or lack of
> > consensus for 2019-03, but the Co-Chairs feel it is the best way to
> > both bring the new draft of the proposed policy to you all *and*
> > obtain the vital information from the NCC their understanding of the
> > policy and likely impact.
> >
> > It is at the end of the Review Phase that a decision regarding
> > consensus will be made.
> >
> > As always, please let me know if you have any questions.
> 
> one.  can we assume that the co-chairs and marco have memory, or do we all
> need to restate our views, maybe even after reading a new version?

Yes, you can assume this.

I mean, we would, of course, strongly suggest that people read the new version, 
as we're sure you all will, and we're sure the authors would appreciate knowing 
if this version is better or worse, from the point of view of the members of 
the WG, but yes, we have memory.

Obviously if we reach a Concluding Phase and the Co-Chairs determination is 
other than what any member believes it should be, there are further 
opportunities to comment at that point.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Policy Proposal 2019-03 Update

[Brian Nisbet]

Carlos (and Randy, and Sara),

I misspoke somewhat earlier.

Yes, the Co-Chairs and the NCC Policy Officer have memory, but it is during the 
Review Phase that a measure of consensus is gathered and this is especially 
important when a new draft is issued.

So I would ask, after the new draft is sent out (real soon now) and indeed 
after the NCC Impact Analysis in May, that those who have expressed opinions 
before either restate or state new opinions as much as possible. If this is 
"the new draft does not address my concerns and they still stand" then that is 
fine. Obviously the more detail the better.

Similarly expressions of support can be restated, but as mentioned, many times, 
it's not a vote, it's a discussion to gauge consensus.

As to your specific point, Sara, when the Co-Chairs work to declare consensus 
or lack thereof we will (with the wonderful support of Marco), attempt to lay 
out the various arguments, broadly who said what and why we're saying what 
we're saying. This is a non-trivial piece of work and it is properly done at 
that point. Of course the WG can disagree with that determination based on the 
discussions and the evidence presented.

In regards to the difference between the two drafts of the proposal, when v2.0 
is published, you will be able to compare here:

https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2019-03

I hope this helps,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

> -Original Message-
> From: Carlos Friaças 
> Sent: Friday 26 April 2019 09:50
> To: Brian Nisbet 
> Cc: Randy Bush ; anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
> Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Policy Proposal 2019-03 Update
> 
> 
> Hi Brian, All,
> 
> This is a doubt i have about the PDP:
> 
> If concerns are addressed within a new text version, aren't people that have
> opposed the previous version required to state if they agree or not that their
> concerns were addressed...?
> 
> If those opposing remain silent the default interpretation will be that they
> are still opposing the proposal, even if the text they have opposed to is not
> there anymore?
> 
> Can you please clarify?
> 
> Thanks,
> Carlos
> 
> 
> On Fri, 26 Apr 2019, Brian Nisbet wrote:
> 
> (...)
> >>
> >> one.  can we assume that the co-chairs and marco have memory, or do
> >> we all need to restate our views, maybe even after reading a new
> version?
> >
> > Yes, you can assume this.
> >
> > I mean, we would, of course, strongly suggest that people read the new
> version, as we're sure you all will, and we're sure the authors would
> appreciate knowing if this version is better or worse, from the point of view
> of the members of the WG, but yes, we have memory.
> >
> > Obviously if we reach a Concluding Phase and the Co-Chairs determination
> is other than what any member believes it should be, there are further
> opportunities to comment at that point.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Brian
> > Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG
> >
> >

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] AS24940 Hetzner -- non-role contact wanted

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

This is an open mailing list for the RIPE Anti-Abuse Working Group where a 
variety of matters, including policy, are discussed.

It is not, nor hopefully will it ever be, a closed list with vetting etc. There 
are lists like that out there, they serve a very useful purpose, but this list 
is not them.

Like all RIPE mailing lists it is as open as possible and will remain so.

The Code of Conduct is not there to be used as a stick. It is there to welcome, 
to set certain norms of behaviour and, hopefully, to support useful discussion 
across RIPE mailing lists and meetings.

To be very clear, we do not believe anyone in this conversation has been 
misleading or impersonating anyone. We believe there are differences of 
opinion, possibly even very deep ones, but, barring the uncivil modes of 
discourse, nothing to trouble the Code of Conduct.

We would ask both of you, and all members of this list, to treat each other 
with civility, to discuss the technical or policy merits of any discussion and 
to assume good intent from others in all things. 

What any member of the list does in direct mail between the themselves is up to 
them, of course. However we would hope for a world in which there is as much 
civility as possible.

All of the Co-Chairs serve at the pleasure of the Working Group. If anyone here 
feels that one or more of us are not chairing it in an appropriate fashion then 
the procedure for the removal of a Co-Chair is here:

https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/wg/anti-abuse/anti-abuse-wg-chair-selection-process

We consider both Andre & Ronald to be members of this list and, barring future 
events, have no intention of removing either of you. We consider this matter to 
be closed at this point and we hope the list can return to the ongoing 
discussions. In a civil manner.

If anyone wishes to discuss this with the WG Chairs directly, please email 
aa-wg-ch...@ripe.net

Thanks,

Alireza, Brian & Tobias
Co-Chairs, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

> -Original Message-
> From: anti-abuse-wg  On Behalf Of ac
> Sent: Friday 26 April 2019 05:51
> To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
> Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] AS24940 Hetzner -- non-role contact wanted
> 
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 17:41:20 -0700
> "Ronald F. Guilmette"  wrote:
> 
> >
> > Mr. Chairman, I ask you to summarily eject the member in question from
> > the mailing list with clear instructions not to return and not to try
> > to do so via the ruse of yet additional sock puppet fradulent
> > identities.  I ask you to do so in accordance with your clear
> > authority and responsibility under the RIPE Code of Conduct, which is,
> > I think, not at all ambiguous on this point.  You cannot, I think,
> > merely stand by and allow arbitrary actors with hidden agendas and
> > fradulent identities to infiltrate and repeatedly disrupt and thwart
> > this Working Group, or this mailing list, whether via repeated
> > off-topic rantings or via other artificial means.  To do so would be a
> > serious abrogation of your responsibilities as Chair of this WG, and
> > one which I and others might reasonably feel duty bound to bring to
> > the attention of other and higher RIPE authorities.
> >
> > I await the Chair's response and the Chair's appropriate action.
> >
> 
> So, if you do not get your way, me being ejected, then you are threatening
> the Chair?
> 
> All in the same post.
> 
> You are indeed an arrogant and ignorant bully.
> 
> And, you are the disruption. You have carefully crafted an identity over a
> decade or more, yet, even after looking carefully, I cannot see that you are
> pushing packets in RIPE. I also cannot see you anywhere among my own
> colleagues and I therefore do not understand what you are doing in this WG,
> except to cause disruption, division and spread FUD.
> 
> Your behavior even in this thread:
> 
> 1. You post on a website (links included in your original post) clearly states
> that Hetzner cannot investigate without you agreeing that they send the
> email headers to the service provider
> 
> You claim that this idea is the worst idea since "This is probably the best
> European idea since the one about invading Russia in Winter."
> 
> 2. When I point out that you are technically incorrect or ignorant - as the
> Hetzner response is completely true, ethical and correct and YOU are wrong
> 
> You start attacking me, with us now here where you are threatening that if I
> am not ejected from this WG you " I and others might reasonably feel duty
> bound to bring to the attention of other and higher RIPE authorities."
> 
> Your disruptive, arrogant and bully behavior is cause for you to be ejected
> from this WG
> 
> Andre
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

[anti-abuse-wg] Current List Behaviour/Discussion

[Brian Nisbet]

Folks,

We thought we had made ourselves very clear. Apparently not.

The current conversation is not useful to the list. Please stop it now.

Andre stays on the list. Ronald stays on the list. Both of you are welcome to 
unsubscribe. But further mails on this topic will cause the Co-Chairs to ask 
the NCC to put the senders into moderation.

Talk about something else, or nothing at all. Enjoy your weekends.

Thank you.

Brian
Co-Chair, AA-WG

Brian Nisbet,
Service Operations Manager, HEAnet

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] New on RIPE Labs: Abuse-c Validation: Update on Progress and Some Numbers

[Brian Nisbet]

Mirjam,

Thanks for this and, of course, thanks to Angela for leading this work.

To mention, this will also be presented at the WG session at RIPE 78.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Mirjam Kuehne 

Sent: Wednesday 15 May 2019 10:47
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: [anti-abuse-wg] New on RIPE Labs: Abuse-c Validation: Update on 
Progress and Some Numbers

Dear colleagues,

With RIPE 78 around the corner, we want to update you on our work to
validate abuse contacts in the RIPE Database:

https://labs.ripe.net/Members/angela_dallara/abuse-c-validation-update-on-progress

Kind regards,
Mirjam Kühne
RIPE NCC

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")

[Brian Nisbet]

Marco,

Thanks for this, and thanks to Jordi for proposing it.

We will be discussing this next week at RIPE 78, but time is tight and, of 
course, the important comments need to be on the mailing list, where the 
decision is made.

As always the Co-Chairs hope for a respectful discussion on the proposal and we 
would ask everyone to be as clear as possible as to why they do or do not 
support it.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

> -Original Message-
> From: anti-abuse-wg  On Behalf Of
> Marco Schmidt
> Sent: Thursday 16 May 2019 13:21
> To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
> Subject: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-
> mailbox")
> 
> Dear colleagues,
> 
> A new RIPE Policy proposal, 2019-04, "Validation of "abuse-mailbox"", is now
> available for discussion.
> 
> This proposal aims to have the RIPE NCC validate "abuse-c:" information
> more often, and introduces a new validation process that requires manual
> input from resource holders.
> 
> You can find the full proposal at:
> https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2019-04
> 
> As per the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP), the purpose of this four-
> week Discussion Phase is to discuss the proposal and provide feedback to the
> proposer.
> 
> At the end of the Discussion Phase, the proposer, with the agreement of the
> Anti-Abuse Working Group Chairs, decides how to proceed with the
> proposal.
> 
> We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to  abuse...@ripe.net> before 14 June 2019.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Marco Schmidt
> Policy Officer
> RIPE NCC
> 
> Sent via RIPE Forum -- https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum

[anti-abuse-wg] Agenda Update - Anti-Abuse WG Session @ RIPE78

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

Here is the latest agenda for the AA-WG Session, taking place in the Main Room 
at 09:00 GMT on Thursday 23rd May. Remote participation will be available, all 
of the details on ripe78.ripe.net

A. Administrative Matters

* Welcome
* Scribe, Jabber, Stenography
* Microphone Etiquette
* Approve Minutes from RIPE 77
* Finalise agenda

B. Update

* B1. Recent List Discussion

C. Policies -

 *C.1. RIPE NCC Update on 2017-02, Angela Dall'Ara - RIPE NCC
 *C.2. Policy Proposal 2019-03 - BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation, 
Carlos Friacas, FCT | FCCN & Jordi Palet Martinez, The IPv6 Company
 *C.3. Policy Proposal 2019-04 - Validation of "abuse-mailbox", Jordi Palet 
Martinez, The IPv6 Company

D. Interactions -



E. Presentation -

* E1. The Curious Case of Fake UK LIRs - Gaith Taha
* E2. Domain Abuse Activity Reporting - Samaneh Tajalizadehkhoob


X. A.O.B.

Z. Agenda for RIPE 79

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")

[Brian Nisbet]

Folks,

> -Original Message-
> From: anti-abuse-wg  On Behalf Of Gert
> Doering
> Sent: Friday 17 May 2019 11:03
> 
> And, at least try the minimum amount of politeness in quoting according to
> local customs.
> 
> (@chairs: can i propose a policy that makes it required policy to do proper e-
> mail quoting style, and otherwise people will permanently lose their Internet
> access?  This would arguably only hit bad people and would be so much relief
> from this continuos abuse of my eyes!)

Can we please let this particular one go? For various reasons, such as 
software, style and the changing nature of reality, top posting is a common 
thing. This is the reality. I realise it breaks sacred oaths and trusts and I 
also understand a lot of people find it more difficult to parse, but it's the 
reality and, even if it could be changed, remarks on this mailing list will not 
change it.

I am happy to discuss this further with you over a beverage at the meeting next 
week, but it ain't gonna change, so I do not believe it's helpful to any 
discussion to continue to refer to it.

Thanks,

Brian
(Only slightly with his Co-Chair hat on, this is more of a hope than anything 
else...)

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

[anti-abuse-wg] Posting Styles (Was: RE: 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox") )

[Brian Nisbet]

Gert,

> -Original Message-
> From: Gert Doering 
> Sent: Friday 17 May 2019 11:15
> To: Brian Nisbet 
> Cc: Gert Doering ; Suresh Ramasubramanian
> ; anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
> Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of
> "abuse-mailbox")
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 10:08:24AM +, Brian Nisbet wrote:
> > > And, at least try the minimum amount of politeness in quoting
> > > according to local customs.
> >
> > Can we please let this particular one go?
> 
> No.  We manage to do this on the APWG list just fine.

Great. I mean, I can find a few incidents of top posting on APWG, but maybe 
they all get a polite mail from you and never do it again? Neither I nor the 
other Co-Chairs have any wish to impose such style guides on AAWG.

> It can be done if people *care*.  And this caring is a matter of basic 
> politness,
> "if you enter a discussion, you follow style of the previous speakers".
> 
> If the AAWG list is "we have no interest in politness towards people who
> actually have to read what others write, and try to make sense out of
> discussions with quoting", I will no longer *read* what is written here,
> because it takes too much valuable lifetime.

You're extrapolating in a very wrong way here. We have great interest in 
politeness and clear communication. But I'm also realistic enough to realise 
that I'm not going to stop people from posting if they don't follow a 
particular style. This is an open mailing list with lots of different people on 
it. Honestly, I was all for "inline only" back in the day, but I've made my 
peace with reality on this one. It is a great pity that you decide not to read 
conversations I still believe are fairly easy to comprehend.

> Isn't this the place where we discuss about (very complicated) rules wrt e-
> mail abuse handling verifcation?  And we're not able to agree on a basic set
> of rules for useful e-mail discussions?

Opinions will vary, consensus will not be reached. There are hills I will die 
on, this is not one of them. If it's one you will die on, then that will be a 
great loss to the working group as your wisdom and experience are greatly 
appreciated.

Maybe we could honestly, pause this discussion here and take it up in person in 
Reykjavik as I do feel that might be more productive.

Thanks,

Brian
(With a bit more of his Co-Chair hat on, but even so)

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")

[Brian Nisbet]

I would absolutely agree and I hope that all members of this list, and indeed, 
all adults, would either stop, or never start, such behaviour.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270



From: Suresh Ramasubramanian 
Sent: Saturday 18 May 2019 09:55
To: Brian Nisbet
Subject: Fwd: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of 
"abuse-mailbox")

Hi

This is flat out abusive rather than merely childish behavior - replying 
offlist to every top posted email on the wg with "top post"

Thanks
-srs



-- Forwarded message --
From: Bengt Gördén mailto:ben...@resilans.se>>
Date: Saturday, May 18, 2019
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 New Policy Proposal (Validation of 
"abuse-mailbox")
To: Suresh Ramasubramanian mailto:ops.li...@gmail.com>>


top post

--

Bengt Gördén
Resilans AB




--
Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.li...@gmail.com<mailto:ops.li...@gmail.com>)

[anti-abuse-wg] Off-List Responses

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

This adds to the list of things I never expected to have to send an email 
about, but...

While obviously neither the Co-Chairs, nor the RIPE Community, has any wish, 
intent or ability to "police" mails between two private individuals; I would 
ask that mails sent off-list *in response* to on-list mails stay within the 
spirit of conduct that is expected of those interacting in the RIPE Community.

As always, please discuss policies, ideas and approaches, do not attack groups 
or individual people and certainly do not send abusive messages. 

If you have any questions or comments on this, please don't hesitate to contact 
aa-wg-ch...@ripe.net

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Update on Impact Analysis for 2019-03, “BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation”

[Brian Nisbet]

Marco,

Thanks for this.

Colleagues, the Co-Chairs and the authors of 2019-03 have been discussing how 
best to progress this in the fairest way for the whole community.

Given the length of time it has taken, understandably, to prepare the Impact 
Analysis and the fact that we are now deep into the summer in Europe, we do not 
feel that now is the right time to re-commence the discussion. 

With this in mind, it has been decided that we are going to pause this for a 
few weeks and the IA and next version of the policy will be released, and so 
the Review Phase will start, at the beginning of September this year. This is 
unusual, but we feel this is the way to ensure the best discussion can take 
place amongst the widest group of interested parties.

Thank you all for your discussion on 2019-03 so far and we look forward to more 
robust input in September.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

> -Original Message-
> From: anti-abuse-wg  On Behalf Of
> Marco Schmidt
> Sent: Thursday 11 July 2019 11:40
> To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
> Subject: [anti-abuse-wg] Update on Impact Analysis for 2019-03, “BGP
> Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation”
> 
> Dear colleagues,
> 
> We would like to give you an update on our impact analysis for the policy
> proposal 2019-03, “BGP Hijacking is a RIPE Policy Violation”.
> 
> After feedback from the initial Discussion Phase, the proposers have created
> a second version of the proposal that will move forward to the Review
> Phase.
> 
> As per the Policy Development Process (PDP), the RIPE NCC must perform an
> impact analysis on the proposal and publish this before the Review Phase can
> begin. We usually aim to finish our analysis within four weeks.
> 
> In this case, our review has taken much longer than normal. This is because
> the proposal creates a completely new process within the RIPE NCC, with a
> number of operational, legal and communications implications. The proposal
> also outlines detailed steps for this process that have to be checked for
> consistency and feasibility.
> 
> We are almost finished and expect this to be ready soon. The WG Chairs will
> then work with the proposers to determine when the new version of the
> policy should be published (along with our impact analysis) so that the
> Review Phase can start.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Marco Schmidt
> Policy Officer
> RIPE NCC
> 
> Sent via RIPE Forum -- https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/forum

[anti-abuse-wg] Reminder: Mailing List Code of Conduct

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

Because we wish to be very open on this, the Co-Chairs would like to remind 
everyone of the RIPE Mailing List/RIPE Forum Code of Conduct.

https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/ripe-mailing-list-ripe-forum-code-of-conduct

There is plenty of room for debate, discussion and even arguments on this list 
and in this community. What there isn't room for is attacking people, for 
shutting down arguments with ad hominem attacks and for choosing to be rude 
rather than taking the opportunity to educate. All of this is a balance, but 
sadly here discussion is unbalanced more frequently than it should be.

We have a great wish to see that useful discussion continue and flourish.

Where the Co-Chairs feel that there are issues, we will contact the relevant 
parties personally to discuss and take whatever action is deemed necessary 
after those discussions.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Reminder: Mailing List Code of Conduct

[Brian Nisbet]

Andre,

Thank you for your apology. We seem to live in an increasingly complex world 
and the trade-offs between convenient and open/free have never seemed quite 
so... difficult... to me at least.

Should you feel you can return to us at some point and engage in a continually 
constructive manner, you would be welcome.

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG 

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

> -Original Message-
> From: anti-abuse-wg  On Behalf Of ac
> Sent: Friday 19 July 2019 06:34
> To: Brian Nisbet 
> Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
> Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Reminder: Mailing List Code of Conduct
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I apologise for my recent poor behavior and my use of profanity (specifically
> the word "bullshit") - I have grown much less tolerant of large tech and as
> society is losing this war anyway, it is causing me enormous amounts of
> stress. When innocent things happen that contribute negatively to the
> advancement of a free and open society and play into the hands of the
> dominating players, I lose my cool...
> 
> This is not cool and not fair to you and I am sorry :(
> 
> I do understand that my behavior does not serve my cause and I am not a
> nice enough person to simply be myself on this list, so my choices are to be
> someone else or to leave.
> 
> So long and thanks for all the fish,
> 
> Andre
> 
> On Thu, 18 Jul 2019 16:44:45 +
> Brian Nisbet  wrote:
> 
> > Colleagues,
> >
> > Because we wish to be very open on this, the Co-Chairs would like to
> > remind everyone of the RIPE Mailing List/RIPE Forum Code of Conduct.
> >
> > https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/ripe-mailing-list-ripe-forum-cod
> > e-of-conduct
> >
> > There is plenty of room for debate, discussion and even arguments on
> > this list and in this community. What there isn't room for is
> > attacking people, for shutting down arguments with ad hominem attacks
> > and for choosing to be rude rather than taking the opportunity to
> > educate. All of this is a balance, but sadly here discussion is
> > unbalanced more frequently than it should be.
> >
> > We have a great wish to see that useful discussion continue and
> > flourish.
> >
> > Where the Co-Chairs feel that there are issues, we will contact the
> > relevant parties personally to discuss and take whatever action is
> > deemed necessary after those discussions.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Brian
> > Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG
> >
> > Brian Nisbet
> > Service Operations Manager
> > HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network 1st
> > Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
> > +35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
> > Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270
> >
> >
> 

[anti-abuse-wg] RIPE79 Agenda Creation!

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

As you're hopefully aware the next RIPE meeting, and so the next meeting of the 
AA-WG, is just a month away!

The AA-WG will be meeting on Thursday 17th October at 09:00 CEST. We have been 
somewhat remiss in soliciting items for the agenda, so please email 
aa-wg-ch...@ripe.net with any items you would like to raise, work you believe 
the WG should be doing or presentations that may be of interest to us all.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

[anti-abuse-wg] Fw: [aa-wg-chair] RIPE 78 Anti-Abuse WG Minutes

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

Here are the draft minutes from RIPE 78. Please let us know if you have any 
issues or required changes.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

RIPE 78-Anti-Abuse-WG Minutes.docx
Description: RIPE 78-Anti-Abuse-WG Minutes.docx

[anti-abuse-wg] RIPE Anti-Abuse WG Invitation

[Brian Nisbet]

Alexander,

My name is Brian Nisbet, Co-Chair of the RIPE Anti-Abuse WG.

Our WG meets during RIPE79, on the morning of Thursday 17th at 09:00 CEST.

You can read about the WG here: 
https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/wg/anti-abuse

We are aware that the FIRST presentation was declined from the Plenary, but I 
was wondering if you would be interested in presenting to the Anti-Abuse WG? 
While it wouldn't be the full Plenary audience I think there would be a lot of 
the "right people" in the room on Thursday morning. 

Unfortunately we wouldn't be able to give you 40 minutes of our 90 minute slot, 
but if you felt the presentation and Q&A could fit into ~25 minutes, then that 
would be possible.

To avoid any misconceptions, you would still need to have bought a ticket for 
the meeting.

Please let me know what you think.

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE Anti-Abuse WG Invitation

[Brian Nisbet]

Well, you've all seen part of the possible agenda for this meeting!

Sorry about that folks.

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG
(Who should clearly check and re-check the CC: field this early in the 
morning...)

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

> -Original Message-
> From: anti-abuse-wg  On Behalf Of Brian
> Nisbet
> Sent: Thursday 19 September 2019 09:00
> To: alexander.jae...@first.org
> Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
> Subject: [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE Anti-Abuse WG Invitation
> 
> Alexander,
> 
> My name is Brian Nisbet, Co-Chair of the RIPE Anti-Abuse WG.
> 
> Our WG meets during RIPE79, on the morning of Thursday 17th at 09:00 CEST.
> 
> You can read about the WG here:
> https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/wg/anti-abuse
> 
> We are aware that the FIRST presentation was declined from the Plenary,
> but I was wondering if you would be interested in presenting to the Anti-
> Abuse WG? While it wouldn't be the full Plenary audience I think there would
> be a lot of the "right people" in the room on Thursday morning.
> 
> Unfortunately we wouldn't be able to give you 40 minutes of our 90 minute
> slot, but if you felt the presentation and Q&A could fit into ~25 minutes, 
> then
> that would be possible.
> 
> To avoid any misconceptions, you would still need to have bought a ticket for
> the meeting.
> 
> Please let me know what you think.
> 
> Brian
> Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG
> 
> Brian Nisbet
> Service Operations Manager
> HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network 1st Floor, 5
> George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
> +35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
> Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270
> 

[anti-abuse-wg] Withdrawal of Policy Proposal 2019-03

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

The Co-Chairs would like to inform you that the proposers of 2019-03, Carlos 
Friacas and Jordi Palet Martinez have withdrawn the proposal.

They felt that they were unable to create a policy text that addressed the 
concerns of the RIPE NCC Executive Board and part of the Community regarding 
possible liability risks to the Association.

As the policy is withdrawn, this email is not an invitation to discuss this 
further. We suggest that can be done either in private email or in person, 
should the proposers welcome that.

We would like to thank Carlos and Jordi for all their work on this proposal. We 
would also like to thank the WG for robust discussion and I would welcome 
proposals from all on ways to reduce abuse in the RIPE region.

A formal notification of the withdrawal will come from the NCC Policy Officer, 
Marco Schmidt.

Thank you,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

[anti-abuse-wg] Draft Agenda RIPE 79

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

Just to let you all know, we should have a draft agenda by some point tomorrow. 
There were a few changes and I didn't want to publish anything not mentioning 
2019-03 until the final decision had been made there, because that would have 
been jumping the gun.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Discussion Phase (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")

[Brian Nisbet]

Thanks for this, Marco!

Colleagues, this is a second Discussion Phase and it gives the WG the 
opportunity to comment on the new version. Unsurprisingly it will be on the 
agenda for our meeting at RIPE 79.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

From: anti-abuse-wg  On Behalf Of Marco Schmidt
Sent: Tuesday 1 October 2019 13:19
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Discussion Phase (Validation of 
"abuse-mailbox")


Dear colleagues,

A new version of RIPE Policy proposal, 2019-04, "Validation of 
"abuse-mailbox"", is now available for discussion.

This proposal aims to have the RIPE NCC validate "abuse-c:" information more 
often, and introduces a new validation process that requires input from 
resource holders.

The proposal has been updated following the last round of discussion and is now 
at version v2.0. Some of the differences from version v1.0 include:
- Removes ambiguous examples from the policy text
- Defines mandatory elements of the abuse handling procedures
- Removes the prohibtion of automated processing of the abuse reports

You can find the full proposal at:
https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2019-04

As per the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP), the purpose of this four-week 
Discussion Phase is to discuss the proposal and provide feedback to the 
proposer.

At the end of the Discussion Phase, the proposer, with the agreement of the 
Anti-Abuse Working Group Chairs, decides how to proceed with the proposal.

We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to 
<mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net> before 30 October 2019.

Kind regards,

Marco Schmidt
Policy Officer
RIPE NCC

[anti-abuse-wg] Draft Agenda, RIPE 79 Anti-Abuse WG Session, October 17th, 09:00 CEST

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

Apologies for the delay with what is doubtless you most hotly anticipated email 
of the month!

Here is the draft agenda for the RIPE Anti-Abuse WG, scheduled to take place on 
October 17th at 09:00 CEST at RIPE 79 in Rotterdam. As always remote 
participation will be available with the details on https://ripe79.ripe.net

I will not, unfortunately, be arriving in Rotterdam until late on Wednesday, 
but I will be there bright and early for the WG session on Thursday morning!

Please let the Co-Chairs know if you have any questions or late additions to 
the agenda.

A. Administrative Matters

* Welcome
* Scribe, Jabber, Stenography
* Microphone Etiquette
* Approve Minutes from RIPE 78
* Finalise agenda

B. Update

* B1. Recent List Discussion

C. Policies -

 *C.1. RIPE NCC Update on 2017-02, Marco Schmidt - RIPE NCC
 *C.2. Policy Proposal 2019-04 - Validation of "abuse-mailbox", Jordi Palet 
Martinez, The IPv6 Company

D. Interactions -

E. Presentation -

 *E.1. "How Effective is ASN-Drop?" - Carlos Friacas, FCCN   
 *E.2. "LACNIC's WARP Centre" - Guillermo Cicileo, LACNIC

X. A.O.B.

Z. Agenda for RIPE 80

Regards,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Non-ASCII characters in abuse-mailbox addresses

[Brian Nisbet]

Ronald,

You're quite correct, albeit there is no harm in raising such matters here, the 
DB WG is absolutely the correct place to discuss and propose any changes and 
where the substantive discussion should take place. I should have mentioned 
this earlier in the conversation.

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

> -Original Message-
> From: anti-abuse-wg  On Behalf Of
> Ronald F. Guilmette
> Sent: Tuesday 19 November 2019 20:33
> To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
> Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Non-ASCII characters in abuse-mailbox
> addresses
> 
> In message <17839.1574194...@segfault.tristatelogic.com>, I wrote:
> 
> >This is exactly what I had suggested.  Using only punycode for domain
> >names would restrict the representation of the domain names in the data
> >base to traditional 7-bit US-ASCII.
> 
> My apologies to everyone.  When I posted that reply I didn't even notice the
> fact that the representation of domain names in the data base was/is now
> being discussed also on the anti-abuse mailing list.  This very topic has 
> already
> been discussed on the DB working group mailing list, which is arguably a more
> appropriate place for this discussion since abuse contact email addresses
> (and their associated domain name parts) are quite certainly not the only
> places where email addrsses may appear within the WHOIS data base.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> rfg

[anti-abuse-wg] FW: [aa-wg-chair] Draft Anti-Abuse WG Minutes from RIPE 79

[Brian Nisbet]

Folks,

Please see the draft minutes from our WG Session in Rotterdam. If you have any 
corrections or objections, could you please let us know ASAP?

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

From: Aa-wg-chair  On Behalf Of Alun Davies
Sent: Monday 16 December 2019 09:52
To: aa-wg-ch...@ripe.net
Subject: [aa-wg-chair] Draft Anti-Abuse WG Minutes from RIPE 79

Hello Brian, Tobias, Alireza,

Please find attached the draft minutes for the Anti-Abuse WG session at RIPE 
79. Do take a look when you have a moment and let us know if you’d like any 
changes made. If we don’t hear back from you by the end of this week, we’ll go 
ahead and publish them as is to the website.


Cheers,
Alun Davies
RIPE NCC


Draft Anti-Abuse WG Minutes RIPE 79.docx
Description: Draft Anti-Abuse WG Minutes RIPE 79.docx
Anti-Abuse Working Group 

Thursday, 17 October 09:00 - 10:30

Chair: Brian Nisbet

Scribe: Ulka Athale
Status: Draft



Co-Chair Brian Nisbet welcomed attendees, thanked the RIPE NCC staff supporting 
with scribing and monitoring chat, the stenographers, and stated that his 
co-Chair Tobias could not attend the session. The minutes from the Anti-Abuse 
session at RIPE 78 were approved. In his opening remarks, he mentioned the 
policy proposal 2019-03 that was withdrawn, and that he was surprised by the 
form of words of the Impact Analysis and that the Executive Board said that 
they were not going to do the thing that the community may or may not be asking 
them to do. In this case the policy proposal was withdrawn, but if it had been 
approved by the working group, it might have led to a constitutional crisis of 
sorts, and this is something that should be discussed. Brian asked the room if 
they had any further remarks on this issue. There were no comments.



C.1. RIPE NCC Update on 2017-02

Marco Schmidt - RIPE NCC

Presentation available at: https://ripe79.ripe.net/archives/video/244



Jordi Palet Martinez asked if the 25% was after they sent the additional 
emails, after the automated validation failed. 



Marco clarified that there was one month in which they sent several automated 
emails with a stricter tone, and there was still around 20-25% who didn’t 
respond, requiring additional action.



Brian Nisbet asked if this now happens as a regular part of the process, once a 
year. Marco replied that in general it is a part of the regular process. The 
most important abuse mailboxes to fix were the LIR ones. If the abuse mailboxes 
of independent resources and more specific PA ones were not working, they would 
go to the sponsoring LIR to check the abuse contact.



Herve Clement, Orange, said that he was pretty happy with the proposal. He 
added that he had a question about the workload for the RIPE NCC, but that 
Marco had already partially answered it. He added that he thought that Marco 
now had an element to respond to the next policy proposals, proposed by Jordi 
perhaps, to evaluate the possible workload of the RIPE NCC and how to go a step 
further beyond such verification.



Rudiger Volk, Deutsche Telecom, asked Marco whether he saw any additional work 
to improve this process and the communications attached to it. He said that he 
didn’t find the information he was receiving very helpful, he would require 
time to work out which customers are actually the source of the problem. He 
suggested looking into providing mechanisms that automates the research on the 
RIPE NCC side and allows the recipient of the problem report to do what they 
are required to without additional efforts.



Marco thanked Rudiger for his feedback and said he would talk to him in more 
detail about how to make things clearer.



Brian also thanked Marco for his work as Policy Development Officer, in light 
of the announcement that Marco will be moving on to the Registration Services 
team at the RIPE NCC. 



C.2. Policy Proposal 2019-04 - Validation of "abuse-mailbox"

Jordi Palet Martinez, The IPv6 Company

Presentation available at: https://ripe79.ripe.net/archives/video/301



Peter Koch, DENIC, commented that when regulators, who are increasingly 
interested in policy making, come up with suggestions, the community usually 
demands that it is fact-based policy or evidence-based policy making. He asked 
Jordi what real world problem he was trying to solve, notwithstanding the 
inclusion of percentages.



Jordi replied that it was simple, the point of having a registry is to have the 
right registration data.



Ruediger said that he agreed with Peter. He had a slightly different angle on 
the same topic. In many of the policy proposals, it looks like people really 
want to police and it is not what RIPE is about. It is strange that Ger

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] FW: [aa-wg-chair] Draft Anti-Abuse WG Minutes from RIPE 79

[Brian Nisbet]

Unfortunately as far as I am aware he is not on the list, or at least I have 
never seen him post here.

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

> -Original Message-
> From: anti-abuse-wg  On Behalf Of
> Ronald F. Guilmette
> Sent: Monday 16 December 2019 19:11
> To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
> Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] FW: [aa-wg-chair] Draft Anti-Abuse WG
> Minutes from RIPE 79
> 
> In message
>  .prod.
> outlook.com>, Brian Nisbet  wrote:
> 
> >Ruediger said that... [when] he looks at routing tables, he sees a lot
> >of odd stuff including faked origin ASes, AS paths that are not
> >technically valid, in RPKI – ROAs for ASNs that should not show up for
> >public routing. Looking at RPKI, reputation does not help because in
> >RPKI there are authorisation forecasts that are completely invalid.
> 
> Due to my general ignorance of these matters, I would very much like to be
> shown some real-world and current examples of each of the above three
> alleged problems, i.e.:
> 
> *)  faked origin ASes
> 
> *)  AS paths that are not technically valid
> 
> *)  ROAs for ASNs that should not show up for public routing.
> 
> I hope that Ruediger is on this list, and that he will provide me with at 
> least
> one or two examples of each of the above.
> 
> My thanks to him in advance for this.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> rfg

[anti-abuse-wg] Update on 2019-04

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

As you may have noticed the Discussion Phase ended for 2019-04 on the 9th of 
December. Since then the Co-Chairs have been speaking to the proposer and the 
RIPE PDO about what to do next after the almost complete lack of discussion in 
the latest phase.

The plan is that Jordi is going to work on text for a new version of the 
proposal, and may well solicit input here, and this new text will be brought to 
the list in January of 2020.

If you have any questions or comments on this, please do let me know.

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-08 New Policy Proposal (RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and Unassigned RIPE NCC Address Space) to be discussed on Routing Working Group Mailing List

[Brian Nisbet]

Erik,

Randy mentioned this, but to be very explicit, this policy is not being 
discussed in the AA-WG. It was X-posted here to make the members of this WG 
aware of a policy being proposed in Routing, so the discussion etc. is taking 
place there.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: Erik Bais 
Sent: Monday 23 December 2019 08:55
To: Petrit Hasani; Brian Nisbet
Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-08 New Policy Proposal (RPKI ROAs for 
Unallocated and Unassigned RIPE NCC Address Space) to be discussed on Routing 
Working Group Mailing List

Hi Petrit & Brian,

Could you provide some insight on the status of this proposal ?

I've seen not much (if at all...) discussion on the topic on the ML.

I've seen that the discussion phase is already passed and we are more than a 
month further . . . and even for the AA-WG ML, with no replies, that is 
probably one of the first ...

Personally, I'm not in favour of this policy as I don't like the NCC to start 
to injecting ROA's that are not allocated or assigned to members or end-users.

I think it sets the wrong precedence for the community and it could open up for 
scope creep to abuse the system for other usage.
So on that regards,  I wouldn't mind if the proposal would be dropped.

Regards,
Erik Bais



On 31/10/2019, 15:40, "anti-abuse-wg on behalf of Petrit Hasani" 
 wrote:

Dear colleagues,

A new RIPE Policy proposal, 2019-08, "RPKI ROAs for Unallocated and 
Unassigned RIPE NCC Address Space", is now available for discussion in the 
Routing Working Group

This proposal aims to instructs the RIPE NCC to create ROAs with origin AS0 
for all unallocated and unassigned address space under its control.

You can find the full proposal at:
https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2019-08

This proposed policy may be of interest to the Anti-Abuse working group as 
well.

Therefore, we encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments 
to  before 29 November 2019.

Kind regards,

--
Petrit Hasani
Policy Officer
RIPE NCC

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] working in new version of 2019-04 (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")

[Brian Nisbet]

Folks, 

While not attempting to discuss the merits or otherwise of a reputation system 
(other than the fact I've seen many of them proposed and we still have lots of 
problems), I would say one thing on your comments below, Ronald.

The RIPE NCC service region is not just the EU, it isn't just the continent of 
Europe. It includes many other countries such as Russia and the entirety of the 
Middle East. With 70+ countries involved it is a lot harder to do something 
that is acceptable everywhere, even while the NCC itself is governed under 
Dutch law.

Just a useful reminder.

Brian

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

> -Original Message-
> From: anti-abuse-wg  On Behalf Of
> Ronald F. Guilmette
> Sent: Wednesday 15 January 2020 01:52
> To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
> Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] working in new version of 2019-04 (Validation of
> "abuse-mailbox")
> 
> In message ,
> Hans-Martin Mosner  wrote:
> 
> >While this would probably paint a pretty solid picture of which network
> >o= perators can be trusted and which can't, there's another point
> >besides your valid concern about abusers gaming the=
> > system: Whoever publishes the results of such user ratings would most
> >likely expose themselves to litigious lawsuits, w= hich neither you nor
> >me nor RIPE NCC really wants to do.
> 
> That comment, and that concern, certainly does not seem to apply in any
> country in which either eBay or TripAdvisor operate.
> 
> Do you folks on your side of the pond not receive eBay?  Are you not able to
> view Tripadvisor.Com?
> 
> Here in this country (U.S.) there are actually -three- separate and clearly
> discrenable legal protections that would cover and that do cover
> circumstances like this.  In no particular order, they are:
> 
>  (*)  The First Amendment.
> 
>  (*)  47 USC 230(c)(1)
> 
>  (*)  47 USC 230(c)(2)(B)
> 
> Ref:
> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww
> .law.cornell.edu%2Fuscode%2Ftext%2F47%2F230&data=02%7C01%7Cb
> rian.nisbet%40heanet.ie%7C4346c5c89cb4424339be08d7995da2a1%7Ccd9e82
> 69dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637146499755991832&sdat
> a=JcDbohTPkHP6aa4TkUU%2BL%2FswCYndB5tol4HPXak2M9Y%3D&res
> erved=0
> 
> The middle one is actually the first-order go-to provision for situations like
> this, and provides for quick dismissal for any silly cases brought against 
> *me*
> for something that *you* have said on some discussion or review web site
> that I just happen to provide electricity, connectivity, and CPU cycles for.
> 
> One would hope that european law might have some counterpart for that,
> but I confess that I really have no idea about that, one way or the other.
> 
> So, um, is the european continent utterly devoid of any and all web sites
> where reviews can or do appear?  Does europe have its own GDPR
> mandated Great Firewall to keep the evil likes of eBay and TripAdvisor out?
> 
> Or were you, Hans-Martin, just saying that in europe, free speech is reserved
> only for those who can afford it, and who conveniently have hoards of
> corporate lawyers covering their backsides?
> 
> Asking seriously, because I don't know the answer.  I'm just puzzled by this
> whole thing, and this concern about lawsuits.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> rfg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] @EXT: RE: working in new version of 2019-04 (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")

[Brian Nisbet]

Sérgio,

I’m not sure if you’ve had the opportunity to read the RIPE Policy Development 
Process - https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies - but it lays out how 
policy is created in the community.

Very deliberately this is not a vote, it comes out of discussion (which can, at 
times, seem to be or actually be, circular and/or not incredibly productive) 
which leads to consensus or lack thereof regarding the policy at hand. The RIPE 
Community that makes these policies is open to all, not just RIPE NCC members 
and a voting mechanism would be very easy to corrupt. While we, as a community, 
must never say “that is the way it is, we cannot change it” the PDP has 
generally worked over the years and has resulted in many new policies being 
created. However the policies and discussions that happen here are often on the 
more complex or more… fraught end of the scale.

At the end of each phase of a proposal myself, Alireza and Tobias, with the 
wonderful help of the Policy Development Officer in the NCC, to look at the 
discussions and determine the next steps, as laid out in the PDP.

Consensus can be hard to judge and sometimes it seems as if no progress is ever 
made, but this WG has produced a number of policies over the years, for the 
better of the Internet, while I acknowledge that they do not go far enough for 
some, and too far for others.

For all the flaws of any human system, I do believe the PDP is a better process 
than would be gained by simply voting on a particular policy at any given point.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

From: anti-abuse-wg  On Behalf Of Sérgio Rocha
Sent: Friday 17 January 2020 00:49
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] @EXT: RE: working in new version of 2019-04 
(Validation of "abuse-mailbox")

Hello everyone,

Someone said: You must be new here, yes it's true, I'm on the list for a few 
months. Maybe that's why you're still optimistic.

Someone said that the shower of comments against any proposed amendment was 
Democracy. Maybe that is what we really need.

Many complain that this working group never produces anything, some agree that 
either the community does something for itself, or sooner or later we will have 
politicians imposing laws and following goals that may not be beneficial.

I have been on the list for a very short time but today I have learned one 
thing: Those who want to do something are more than I imagined, probably a 
silent majority and a noisy blocking group (maybe small). Respect divergence of 
opinion and respect freedom of expression a lot, we debate a lot and do little, 
maybe because we don't put democracy into practice.

Perhaps what we need is for the RIPE NCC to allow us to create polls within the 
site (to have votes with registered accounts) and instead of arguing backwards 
and forwards, we submit ideas to votes, if the proposals have the majority then 
RIPE NCC should take into account the proposals. What I have seen is that all 
attempts to change something die in the debate and we never count votes.

let's keep arguing but let’s vote at the end

Sergio

De: anti-abuse-wg [mailto:anti-abuse-wg-boun...@ripe.net] Em nome de Liam 
Glover via anti-abuse-wg
Enviada: 17 de janeiro de 2020 00:14
Para: ripede...@yahoo.co.uk<mailto:ripede...@yahoo.co.uk>
Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net<mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>
Assunto: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] @EXT: RE: working in new version of 2019-04 
(Validation of "abuse-mailbox")


I’ve been following this mailing list for the last couple of years having read 
far too many arguments resulting in next to no progress.



This post from Denis was a refreshing read and one that many should read more 
than once!



Thank you Denis for a reasoned, adult (accepting the UK jab) and constructive 
message.



Liam

On 16 Jan 2020, at 23:30, ripedenis--- via anti-abuse-wg 
mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>> wrote:

Colleagues

I have just read this whole thread, it took a while (I should get sick more 
often and spend a day in bed reading emails). I have a few points to make. Some 
are similar to points already raised but I will reinforce them. I cut out the 
bits I want to respond to, but sorry I have not included the authors (you will 
know if it's you).


"If I need to use a web form, which is not standard, for every abuse report 
that I need to submit, there is no sufficient time in the world to fill all 
them."

So instead each resource holder must interpret randomly written emails and find 
any relevant information from within lots of junk.


"ever since the day that RIPE NCC first
published an abuse reporting address in the data

[anti-abuse-wg] Periodic Reminder: List Conduct

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

It seems that at some point in every large list discussion I am compelled to 
send a mail of this type. This is not in response to any single mail, rather it 
is a reminder to all.

Please remember to conduct yourselves well on this list, to discuss the matter 
at hand and not to attack the person writing the email. Most of the list 
discussion takes place in the appropriate manner, but I realise that when we're 
discussing matters about which any of us are passionate we can forget this.

Ad hominem attacks, general slights, unfounded accusations, and many other 
things do not contribute to the list discussion. The Co-Chairs can't tell you 
not to send them by private mail (albeit we'd greatly prefer you didn't) nor to 
act in this manner in other for a (albeit we'd prefer if you didn't do that 
either), but we can tell you not to do it here, so please don't.

Thank you all for your interest and passion for this subject.

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Periodic Reminder: List Conduct

[Brian Nisbet]

Honestly, you can disagree all you want, but there are rules of conduct in the 
RIPE community and on this list. My email served as a polite reminder of those 
rules. If a member of the list chooses not to follow them, then steps will be 
taken in regards to direct communication, then moderation of postings if it is 
felt necessary and on from there.

The Co-Chairs would greatly prefer not to have to deal with any of this, nor 
impose any restrictions on engagement with the working group, but if we must, 
we must, because such attacks do not help the list discussion nor the policy 
development process.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

From: anti-abuse-wg  On Behalf Of Fi Shing
Sent: Friday 17 January 2020 11:33
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Periodic Reminder: List Conduct

>> but we can tell you not to do it here, so please don't.

Well... no, i disagree.

Brian Nisbet, i would like to remind you, that ... You are not the Internet 
Police.

In fact, what you consider to be a rule, might not be something that every 
single person on this planet also considers to be a rule, and so therefore, we 
have no rules at all, nor is there any basis for you to impose any rules on 
this list such as that which you have said.

To enforce this rule of "no personal attacks", would require you to open you 
email and read it once every year. That is too much for RIPE to envisage. It's 
too much resources. It's something that no administrator such as you SHOULD 
HAVE TO DO.

So therefore, let us discuss, in meaningless circular fashion, similar to what 
you find inside an insane asylum, this idea of yours.



SOUND FAMILIAR, ANYONE?



- Original Message -
Subject: [anti-abuse-wg] Periodic Reminder: List Conduct
From: "Brian Nisbet" mailto:brian.nis...@heanet.ie>>
Date: 1/17/20 8:23 pm
To: "anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net<mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>" 
mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>>

Colleagues,

It seems that at some point in every large list discussion I am compelled to 
send a mail of this type. This is not in response to any single mail, rather it 
is a reminder to all.

Please remember to conduct yourselves well on this list, to discuss the matter 
at hand and not to attack the person writing the email. Most of the list 
discussion takes place in the appropriate manner, but I realise that when we're 
discussing matters about which any of us are passionate we can forget this.

Ad hominem attacks, general slights, unfounded accusations, and many other 
things do not contribute to the list discussion. The Co-Chairs can't tell you 
not to send them by private mail (albeit we'd greatly prefer you didn't) nor to 
act in this manner in other for a (albeit we'd prefer if you didn't do that 
either), but we can tell you not to do it here, so please don't.

Thank you all for your interest and passion for this subject.

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie<mailto:brian.nis...@heanet.ie> 
www.heanet.ie<http://www.heanet.ie>
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Periodic Reminder: List Conduct

[Brian Nisbet]

Because they are two completely different things.

This is the RIPE Community, of which the RIPE NCC are the secretariat, amongst 
other things. The rules of conduct for this list and the wider community have 
nothing to do with the database, nor abuse verification nor any notion of 
Internet Police.

And honestly, you can attempt to find loopholes or argue nonsensical points of 
logic on this as much as you want. The point remains that there is a code of 
conduct and I am reminding everyone of it.

Thank you,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

From: anti-abuse-wg  On Behalf Of Fi Shing
Sent: Saturday 18 January 2020 07:22
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Periodic Reminder: List Conduct

It appears you missed the point of my email.

How can you say rules apply to this list, but not RIPE itself?

Given the logic of many on this list:


  1.  You are not the internet police,
  2.  Some people may not agree with a rule, so therefore there are no rules at 
all,
  3.  you, as an administrator enforcing this rule of "no personal attacks" 
would require you to open your emails, which is too much to ask of you as an 
administrator.


- Original Message -
Subject: RE: [anti-abuse-wg] Periodic Reminder: List Conduct
From: "Brian Nisbet" mailto:brian.nis...@heanet.ie>>
Date: 1/17/20 10:42 pm
To: "Fi Shing" mailto:phish...@storey.xxx>>, 
"anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net<mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>" 
mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>>
Honestly, you can disagree all you want, but there are rules of conduct in the 
RIPE community and on this list. My email served as a polite reminder of those 
rules. If a member of the list chooses not to follow them, then steps will be 
taken in regards to direct communication, then moderation of postings if it is 
felt necessary and on from there.

The Co-Chairs would greatly prefer not to have to deal with any of this, nor 
impose any restrictions on engagement with the working group, but if we must, 
we must, because such attacks do not help the list discussion nor the policy 
development process.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie<mailto:brian.nis...@heanet.ie> 
www.heanet.ie<http://www.heanet.ie>
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

From: anti-abuse-wg 
mailto:anti-abuse-wg-boun...@ripe.net>> On 
Behalf Of Fi Shing
Sent: Friday 17 January 2020 11:33
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net<mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Periodic Reminder: List Conduct

>> but we can tell you not to do it here, so please don't.

Well... no, i disagree.

Brian Nisbet, i would like to remind you, that ... You are not the Internet 
Police.

In fact, what you consider to be a rule, might not be something that every 
single person on this planet also considers to be a rule, and so therefore, we 
have no rules at all, nor is there any basis for you to impose any rules on 
this list such as that which you have said.

To enforce this rule of "no personal attacks", would require you to open you 
email and read it once every year. That is too much for RIPE to envisage. It's 
too much resources. It's something that no administrator such as you SHOULD 
HAVE TO DO.

So therefore, let us discuss, in meaningless circular fashion, similar to what 
you find inside an insane asylum, this idea of yours.



SOUND FAMILIAR, ANYONE?



- Original Message -
Subject: [anti-abuse-wg] Periodic Reminder: List Conduct
From: "Brian Nisbet" mailto:brian.nis...@heanet.ie>>
Date: 1/17/20 8:23 pm
To: "anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net<mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>" 
mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>>

Colleagues,

It seems that at some point in every large list discussion I am compelled to 
send a mail of this type. This is not in response to any single mail, rather it 
is a reminder to all.

Please remember to conduct yourselves well on this list, to discuss the matter 
at hand and not to attack the person writing the email. Most of the list 
discussion takes place in the appropriate manner, but I realise that when we're 
discussing matters about which any of us are passionate we can forget this.

Ad hominem attacks, general slights, unfounded accusations, and many other 
things do not contribute to the list discussion. The Co-Chairs can't tell you 
not to send them by private mail (albeit we'd greatly prefer you didn't) n

[anti-abuse-wg] First Call For Agenda Items - RIPE 80

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

RIPE 80 will be taking place in Berlin from the 11th - 15th May. All of the 
details about the meeting can be found here:

https://ripe80.ripe.net

The Anti-Abuse Working Group session is currently timetabled for 09:00 CEST on 
Thursday 14th May.

If you would like to raise anything at the meeting, propose a work item for the 
WG, discuss any topics or present on any relevant items, then please email 
aa-wg-ch...@ripe.net

In addition, the general call for plenary presentations is open here:

https://ripe80.ripe.net/submit-topic/cfp/

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet 
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE NCC Executive Board election

[Brian Nisbet]

Ronald,

While obviously I can only make comments for AA-WG (I note there are many WGs 
in x-post) I need to point out that this is not a suitable email for this 
working group.

The NCC Exec Board elections are a matter for the NCC members, not this WG nor 
any other, despite any cross-over in membership.

Obviously you may speak to whomever you wish on this matter, but please do not 
use this mailing list as a vehicle for that. It is not part of the charter nor 
purpose of the WG.

I would also point out that the order of candidates on the website can change, 
so while I am explicitly not asking you to make any more specific comments, I 
would point out that mentioning someone's place on a list is not useful and is 
potentially very harmful. I would, while again asking you not to make any more 
specific comments about who you are talking about, ask that you acknowledge 
this.

I would please ask you and all members of this list to be extremely careful in 
regards to mentioning or alluding to any specific people and their activities.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Ronald F. 
Guilmette 
Sent: Thursday 16 April 2020 08:25
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net ; db...@ripe.net 
; routing...@ripe.net ; 
address-policy...@ripe.net 
Subject: [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE NCC Executive Board election

CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


Greetings all,

I know that all is not right with the world right now, and that most of
you, like me, have much more pressing things on your minds right now, but
someone just sent me the following link and I cannot exactly ignore it:

https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ripe.net%2Fparticipate%2Fmeetings%2Fgm%2Fmeetings%2Fmay-2020%2Fconfirmed-candidates&data=02%7C01%7Cbrian.nisbet%40heanet.ie%7Cd7c81f06348b4f53dca108d7e1d75a95%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C1%7C637226187374036509&sdata=wy76n6BJ0G9TZ9rEmO%2BdoF%2FWFk7Ds3nb5ncvZGPztoo%3D&reserved=0

I would like to call everyone's attention to the last of the three candidates
who have, it seems, "qualified" as candidates for open seats of the RIPE NCC
Executive Board.

As I have already said, I know that things are bad in the world right now,
but I must ask this question:  Is there really no one other than these
three candidates who is willing and/or able to stand for the three open
seats on the RIPE NCC Executive board... three open seats that will be
voted on at the next general meeting, 13-15 May 2020 ?

If not, then it seems that RIPE NCC will soon be following in the new
tradition, established first by AFRINIC only last year, of placing well
and widely known crooks on it board.

I desperately hope it won't come to that, but that is not for me to decide.

The decision is in your hands dear friends.


Regards,
rfg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] [db-wg] RIPE NCC Executive Board election

[Brian Nisbet]

(Yes, I'm still X-Posting, folks, this will be my last email to all the copied 
WGs)

Ronald,

I have no issue with this group fighting abuse, I never have. In fact I would 
warmly welcome more policies, documentation and actions that can do that. That 
isn't to say there haven't been some put forward, albeit not all of those have 
reached consensus. That is the nature of our system, but I will say again that 
we are further along than we were and I hope that progress, even if it's slower 
than some may like, continues.

What I do not think is suitable is a mail to this and other lists putting out 
vague comments, with the most specific (ie the position on a list) referring to 
the wrong person, about an election that is specific to members of the RIPE 
NCC. The crossover is significant, but far from total and I do not feel this is 
the proper place for electioneering.

But you are right, I am not the king. Nor would I ever want to be. I am a 
co-chair of the AA-WG and as such am a facilitator, a coordinator and a 
go-between between this group and other groups. Part of that role is to 
facilitate discussion on this list, including the kind of email I sent 
yesterday.

However I was appointed by this Working Group and it is entirely up to the 
Working Group if they wish me to continue in the job. The process, for those 
who are curious, is contained within this document:

https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/wg/anti-abuse/anti-abuse-wg-chair-selection-process

This is not done to garner support, nor check in on how I'm doing, albeit 
feedback is always welcome, rather I want to be as transparent as possible. 
There is a lot of inertia in our community, as there is in others, and 
sometimes people assume that those in what we shall loosely refer to as 
"leadership positions" are immovable.

Anyway, to return to your point and that of others. Is this Working Group, as a 
single entity, doing enough to fight abuse on the Internet? Almost certainly 
not.

Are many, many members, including people such as yourself Ronald, working very 
hard in a lot of places? Absolutely.

How do we do more? Well, to my mind, we go back to the charter (which can, of 
course, be changed by the Working Group at any point in time) and ask why we 
have never done the documentation work that's in there? Also, we continue with 
incremental policy changes, which is a long, hard, slow road, but gets results.

I would also be mindful of what Tõnu said in regards to outside regulation, 
something I have mentioned at times.

But as with any WG, the power and action is in the hands of the members, not 
*just* the Co-Chairs, who are members too.

As a final point, if you have a preference as to who you would like to see 
elected in May and you don't have a vote yourself, then I encourage you to 
reach out to your friends and colleagues who are members of the RIPE NCC to 
discuss it with them, broadcast it to suitable fora, hire planes to write 
messages in the sky, but please, don't do it here.

Thank you,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: db-wg  on behalf of Ronald F. Guilmette via db-wg 

Sent: Friday 17 April 2020 06:57
Cc: db...@ripe.net; routing...@ripe.net; address-policy...@ripe.net; 
anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [db-wg] [anti-abuse-wg] RIPE NCC Executive Board election

CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


In message 
,
Brian Nisbet  wrote:

>While obviously I can only make comments for AA-WG (I note there are many
>WGs in x-post) I need to point out that this is not a suitable email for
>this working group.

Others may disagree.  I most certainly do.

The Anti-Abuse Working Group has been repeatedly given ample opportunities
to provide a formal definition for the term "abuse" with respect to the
Internet, and Internet resources.  It has declined all of these opportunities.

It logically and inescapably follows from that fact that as far as the
entire RIPE community goes, "abuse" remains in the eye of the beholder.

I know more than a few people, both on this list and elsewhere, who,
like me, are of the opinion that active participation in the fradulent
theft of IP address blocks, regadless of which portion of the world's
Internet they are stolen from, consititutes "abuse" of a kind that quite
properly is and should be a concern of this working group.

Also and likewise, I know more than a few people, both in this Working
Group, and elsewhere, who, like me, are of the op

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Fw: Re: @EXT: RE: RIPE NCC Executive Board election

[Brian Nisbet]

Furio,

I should say that I find the posts with explicit information extremely useful 
as well, along with the presentations we've had at meetings with similar 
content.

My comments on the recent email should *not* be taken to suggest that I do not 
believe such content is suitable for the WG. I absolutely do thing it is 
suitable.

I do not class the post to which I objected as that kind of material.

I think your other comments are definitely food for thought.

Thank you,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of furio 
ercolessi 
Sent: Friday 17 April 2020 11:33
To: anti-abuse-wg
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Fw: Re: @EXT: RE: RIPE NCC Executive Board election

CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


Good morning,

as everybody is certainly aware, the antiabuse scenario has become rather 
complex, so
possibly one of the weak points of this group may be its rather wide charter
[https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ripe.net%2Fparticipate%2Fripe%2Fwg%2Fanti-abuse&data=02%7C01%7Cbrian.nisbet%40heanet.ie%7Cce734e8edeed4a9d5e2e08d7e2bad1cc%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C1%7C637227164321285662&sdata=rLTAy7RTthQkMx7sQQmWdCV5YBPEjnwQ576PNbdOJxs%3D&reserved=0].

With specialized discussions on various other abuse-related topics happening on 
many
different fora around, it is however natural to continue considering this as the
central and reference forum for all aspects related with one single important 
issue:
network assets in the RIPE NCC region (IPv4 ranges and ASNs) used in a 
*dedicated*
way by criminals or abusers (that is, excluding abuse from customers of real 
ISPs
about which nothing can be done here besides chatting).

These groups are very hungry for "clean" ranges, "bulletproof" ranges, "new" 
ranges
in a scenario where IPv4 costs are raising to the stars - with all this implies
in terms, for instance, of corruption as we have seen in the recent AFRINIC 
case.

So, I admit that I am here almost exclusively for informations and discussions
about RIPE NCC resources in the hands of criminals, and in this sense I found 
the
information supplied by Ron to be extremely valuable, even if this may not be
the best place to have a discussion about it and even if his reference to
the position in the list of candidates was probably an unfortunate oversight -
but from previous discussions there was no doubt about the identity of the
questionable candidate.

I would be favorable to either a focusing of the group charter on RIPE NCC
resources dedicated to abuse, or to a new workgroup specifically targeting
this aspect -- even if the presence of abusers themselves and their facilitators
in open groups would limit strongly what the group could achieve operationally.

Regards

Furio


On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 11:30:17AM +0200, Javier Martín wrote:
> Good morning to everybody.
>
> Maybe I have not explained myself well.
>
> My problem is not that they are children or adults, my problem is that there 
> are hackers, and they do what they want, they even own ips in RIPE, and there 
> is no way to do anything, that is the problem that affects us.
>
> The question for me is if we are going to remain motionless or if we are 
> going to act together to counter the situation. The good ones are tied hand 
> and foot, and the bad ones have free field to disturb at ease.
>
>
> Kind regards
> Javier
>
>
>
>
> Javier Martín
> Departamento de Gestión | CentroRed
> tel:  +34 952200958 [tel:+34 963162089]
> site:  centrored.com
> email:  javier.mar...@digitalvalue.es [mailto:javier.mar...@digitalvalue.es]
> dirección:  Av. Ausias March 104, bajo - 46026 - Valencia
> Sobre 17/04/2020 11:21:21, Serge Droz via anti-abuse-wg 
>  escribió:
> Hi Javier
>
>
> > Many times we have hackers perfectly located, many are kids with a lot
> > of ability to annoy, but little to protect themselves (we often find
> > them in forums)
> >
> If many hackers are kids, we don't have legal problem, but we fail as
> society. I think it's beyond the scope of the WG to address this
> problem. But I do feel, that states need to also take care of children
> that show talent in cyber matters. We do it for athletes, making sure
> these kids can spend their energy in sorting competition rather than
> some destructive behaviour.
> Cyber Criminals are good at s

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Fw: Re: @EXT: RE: RIPE NCC Executive Board election

[Brian Nisbet]

Vittorio,

All of the candidates who have been nominated for the Exec Board at present 
have met the criteria set down by the NCC and its members. My point here is 
that it is not up to the AA-WG to interfere in that, rather it is up to the 
membership of the NCC to decide who they (we in my case as I do work for a 
member organisation, but I do not usually post here in that specific capacity) 
wish to see on that Board.

Changes to those criteria are similarly decided by NCC members.

So, where is the right place to discuss this? The RIPE NCC Members Discuss 
list, which is limited to members only, is certainly a forum:

https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/ripe-ncc-mailing-lists/members-discuss

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270



From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Vittorio 
Bertola via anti-abuse-wg 
Sent: Friday 17 April 2020 12:02
To: furio ercolessi; anti-abuse-wg
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Fw: Re: @EXT: RE: RIPE NCC Executive Board election

CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


> Il 17/04/2020 12:33 furio ercolessi  ha scritto:
>
> Good morning,
>
> as everybody is certainly aware, the antiabuse scenario has become rather 
> complex,

Apologies if I jump into this discussion - I do not work for a RIPE member, I 
lurk this list to stay up to date with general abuse trends.

But there is one thing that escapes me: if, as Ron asserts (and this needs to 
be proven), there is an ongoing attempt to put into the RIPE NCC Board one or 
more individuals that are connected with theft of IP space and other abuse, 
isn't this attempt a gigantic form of abuse in itself, with potential 
consequences that could go well beyond RIPE and its members and affect the 
European Internet community as a whole? Why should it not be in topic for the 
abuse list, and where is it in topic then?

--

Vittorio Bertola | Head of Policy & Innovation, Open-Xchange
vittorio.bert...@open-xchange.com
Office @ Via Treviso 12, 10144 Torino, Italy

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] My response to Ronald Guilmette

[Brian Nisbet]

Elad, All,

I consider this email to absolutely full of ad hominem attacks and other 
violations of the RIPE Code of Conduct, which you can read here:

https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/ripe-mailing-list-ripe-forum-code-of-conduct

I would ask you please to desist from any future similar posts and I would ask 
the WG to not further respond to this thread.

Elad, if you have any queries about this, please contact aa-wg-ch...@ripe.net

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Elad Cohen 

Sent: Friday 17 April 2020 22:42
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: [anti-abuse-wg] My response to Ronald Guilmette

CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


Hello Everyone,

Please forgive me for not writing an oficial response in first set of Ronald's 
online madness months ago, I was out of hospitel after full anesthesia and it 
took me months to get back to myself.

Ronald is misery person with nothing and with no one in his life, the only joy 
that he have in his life - is for him to serve as the front person of the 
illegal anonymous organization "The Spamhaus Project".

Here is a presentation that "The Spamhaus Project" wrote on themselves (in the 
following link) and according to it Spamhaus is an illegal anonymous 
organization - they receive a massive amount of illegaly obtained privacy data 
of internet users from internet companies and internet organizations on a 
regular basis - and then they share it in illegal way (without any warrany) 
with law enforcement agencies.

https://www.scribd.com/document/445894312/Spamhaus-Illegal-Private-Data-Violation


Ronald doesn't deny himself being part of "The Spamhaus Project", not only that 
- but his old friend Hank Nussbacher is also part of the illegal anonymous 
organization "The Spamhaus Project", Hank reminds me Judas Iscariot - Hank 
obiously have other interests - it is very sad to see a person at the age of 
Hank acting like a little child.

All the few reports that were made were made by reporters which are connected 
to "The Spamhaus Project" and that are part of "The Spamhaus Project" - not 
only that, the source of the media reports is a person in "The Spamhaus 
Project" which is the owner of that illegal twitter account: 
https://twitter.com/underthebreach , that person is a criminal according to his 
own words in his own twitter account - and that person is also a master of 
cyber influence operations (just like what Coconut Guilmette and Cheerleader 
Nussbacher are doing here, to influence public opinion withouot any single 
proof) - and the owner of that twitter account is also an employee of the 
israeli-based company GeoEdge which financially benefit from that media report 
because they are a direct competitor of the company using the exact same 
netblock, so now I'm explaining to you that that root of this all fake story is 
just business competition, and in addition Coconut Guilmette also attacked the 
Israeli-based company Divinetworks in Nanog (Coconut Guilmette searched an 
unreasonable way why they received a specific grant from a global world 
organization and also defamed them) - so here is why he did it - the 
Israeli-based company Divinetworks is also a direct competitor of the 
Israeli-based company GeoEdge - that their employee is a criminal and the owner 
of the illegal twitter account https://twitter.com/underthebreach and also the 
"source" for the fake few media reports.

In the following link you can see how a high manager in GeoEdge is highly proud 
in how customers attracted to him after the "low value" of competitors, if only 
the world would knew how that company does business.

https://imgur.com/7DF1NSP


That company GeoEdge is not only a criminal company in the way that they do 
business (because their criminal employee in "The Spamhaus Project" is the one 
pumped Coconut Guilmette proof-less ideas), but that company is also a criminal 
in the way that they are tax-evading since 2005 (they are registered in Cyprus 
with fake-single-owner abroad while they have more actual hidden owners in 
Israel that didn't pay any tax for their income since 2005, and one of the 
registered owners is using an international fake name and he is a professional 
money-laundering person, not only for that Israeli company).

They (Coconut Guilmette, Cheerleader Nussbacher and their mob friends at "The 
Spamhaus Project") are very very afrai

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] My response to Ronald Guilmette

[Brian Nisbet]

Elad,

A tit-for-tat conversation will not help anyone here and you have levelled 
accusations at a large number of people.

I am asking you and everyone else involved to cease this conversation on the 
mailing list, it really is as simple as that. What you discuss with Töma or 
others elsewhere is up to you.

You have all said your pieces, you won't convince each other or anyone else at 
this point.

Please stop or we will have to look at moderating posts from people or on 
topics.

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: Elad Cohen 
Sent: Saturday 18 April 2020 13:24
To: Brian Nisbet; Töma Gavrichenkov; Suresh Ramasubramanian
Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] My response to Ronald Guilmette

CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


Brian,

Toma wrote lies about me, he wrote: "who used to obtain IP prefixes in a direct 
violation of the process" - I have the right to respond, I'm being defamed in 
your working group only because I found out who are the real people behind the 
"The Spamhaus Project", and the defamation of me which is taking part for many 
months including antisemitic phrases - seems not to bother you.

Can Toma write facts and data for me and for the community ?

Not to rely on fake media reports with that criminal as a source for the media 
reports: https://twitter.com/underthebreach

Not to try to maneuver the community with "opinions" and foggy sentences, can 
Toma write facts and data that he is basing upon in his cyber influence 
sentence: "in a direct violation of the process" ?

Respectfully,
Elad

From: Brian Nisbet 
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2020 3:17 PM
To: Elad Cohen ; Töma Gavrichenkov ; 
Suresh Ramasubramanian 
Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] My response to Ronald Guilmette

Elad,

I would take this mail as another example of unacceptable behaviour for this 
mailing list.

Again, I would ask you to cease making such statements and the ad hominem 
attacks.

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie 
www.heanet.ie<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heanet.ie%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cbrian.nisbet%40heanet.ie%7C62a6f50f062f42d8e05108d7e3937d4f%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637228094911554938&sdata=sywgw%2FFD%2FE7iRQ30Pwl9CqxqsSu1SS%2BmnM6srZxFwvI%3D&reserved=0>
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270



From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Elad Cohen 

Sent: Saturday 18 April 2020 12:56
To: Töma Gavrichenkov; Suresh Ramasubramanian
Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] My response to Ronald Guilmette

CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


Hello Everyone,

Like I wrote to the community:

"(P.S.: you can recognize now any member of "The Spamhaus Project" that will 
jump now, if he will attack me or support Ron, you can just ask him a simple 
question - "show us a single proof" - and you will see that no proof will be 
displayed, because all of it is part of an illegal "cyber influence operation" 
by "The Spamhaus Project" pumped by the criminal 
https://twitter.com/underthebreach<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Funderthebreach&data=02%7C01%7Cbrian.nisbet%40heanet.ie%7Ce8b6d4b769cd4ab7416108d7e3918a82%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637228086555440602&sdata=A1ScwDAgyeGv4Y%2BE1QuvZGxPODZU%2FVWLYaOK4wx5qbI%3D&reserved=0<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Funderthebreach&data=02%7C01%7Cbrian.nisbet%40heanet.ie%7C62a6f50f062f42d8e05108d7e3937d4f%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637228094911564932&sdata=16h9cFPG1Ku9QrxjSCRKHkAUdWboPbiw%2Be4vYDcF7yg%3D&reserved=0>>)"

And indeed the donkeys jumped.

Regarding Suresh, he took an active role in the event where the illegal 
presentation linked below was presented, you can see his details here:

https://imgur.com/TuDUt77<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fimgur.com%2FTuDUt77&

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] My response to Ronald Guilmette

[Brian Nisbet]

Elad,

I would take this mail as another example of unacceptable behaviour for this 
mailing list.

Again, I would ask you to cease making such statements and the ad hominem 
attacks.

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270



From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Elad Cohen 

Sent: Saturday 18 April 2020 12:56
To: Töma Gavrichenkov; Suresh Ramasubramanian
Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] My response to Ronald Guilmette

CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


Hello Everyone,

Like I wrote to the community:

"(P.S.: you can recognize now any member of "The Spamhaus Project" that will 
jump now, if he will attack me or support Ron, you can just ask him a simple 
question - "show us a single proof" - and you will see that no proof will be 
displayed, because all of it is part of an illegal "cyber influence operation" 
by "The Spamhaus Project" pumped by the criminal 
https://twitter.com/underthebreach<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Funderthebreach&data=02%7C01%7Cbrian.nisbet%40heanet.ie%7Ce8b6d4b769cd4ab7416108d7e3918a82%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637228086555440602&sdata=A1ScwDAgyeGv4Y%2BE1QuvZGxPODZU%2FVWLYaOK4wx5qbI%3D&reserved=0>)"

And indeed the donkeys jumped.

Regarding Suresh, he took an active role in the event where the illegal 
presentation linked below was presented, you can see his details here:

https://imgur.com/TuDUt77<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fimgur.com%2FTuDUt77&data=02%7C01%7Cbrian.nisbet%40heanet.ie%7Ce8b6d4b769cd4ab7416108d7e3918a82%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637228086555445595&sdata=L%2BhAPtstJGAhGkGwbxTgI1fC1LIHYvxsf%2B52GL5vMGw%3D&reserved=0>

https://www.scribd.com/document/445894312/Spamhaus-Illegal-Private-Data-Violation<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scribd.com%2Fdocument%2F445894312%2FSpamhaus-Illegal-Private-Data-Violation&data=02%7C01%7Cbrian.nisbet%40heanet.ie%7Ce8b6d4b769cd4ab7416108d7e3918a82%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637228086555450584&sdata=vwM7uFJl9DZv72TGkA%2BjoeJ%2BpnqHNPAaSrlqXCGZ33c%3D&reserved=0>

Suresh was the session moderator in the private event, and he saw that 
presentation in real-time, Suresh is a member of "The Spamhaus Project" an he 
is a criminal - he is familiar with all the privacy laws violations of "The 
Spamhaus Project" but still he keeps his mouth shut regarding it because it is 
more profitable to him to play a long with his mob friends at "The Spamhaus 
Project" and to play along with all the privacy laws violations that he knows 
of according to the two above links, instead of doing the right thing and to 
shout- that internet privacy is being violated at massive scale by "The 
Spamhaus Project" and by the LEA's that they are working with them.

Here is another private event that Suresh took part in it, an event which is 
related to violating privacy of internet users, you can see that below Suresh 
in the list below - the CTO of "The Spamhaus Project" appear, Larry Rhein.

https://imgur.com/VIi0Kmk<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fimgur.com%2FVIi0Kmk&data=02%7C01%7Cbrian.nisbet%40heanet.ie%7Ce8b6d4b769cd4ab7416108d7e3918a82%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637228086555455576&sdata=OUSwOZLmVX7eZObx%2BVacZF6wPrMdGmBaFkB7IpxGE0o%3D&reserved=0>


Regarding Toma, he is part of "The Spamhaus Project" as well, he wrote nothing 
regarding the initial posts of Coconut Guilmette and only attacking me. Tome is 
exactly like Hank - in order for him to receive "credit points" from the 
important people behind "The Spamhaus Project" for him to gain high valued 
connections / title / career / money - he will betray even his own country - 
"The Spamhaus Project" see his own country as an enemy as a whole (according to 
"The Spamhaus Project" presentation linked above) but that doesn't interfere to 
Toma to be their horn, Toma - if you have any issue regarding your country - 
please don't take it on me.

Regarding what you wrote - "who used to obtain IP prefixes in a direct 
violation of the process":
"The Spamhaus Project" proceeds, through Toma, with their illegal cyber 
influence operation - can you please explain to me

[anti-abuse-wg] Call For Agenda Items RIPE 80

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

As you are all no doubt aware RIPE 80 will be an online only meeting.

This is a new departure for us all, but significant preparation has already 
been done and I'm really looking forward to a great event.

The Anti-Abuse WG has a slot from 10:00 - 10:45 CEST on Thursday 14th May. If 
you have any matters you'd like to raise, please let me know as soon as 
possible.

And remember, you need to register for RIPE 80. You can do so, free of charge, 
here:

https://ripe80.ripe.net/attend/register/

Thanks,

Brian

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Call For Agenda Items RIPE 80

[Brian Nisbet]

Elad,

Let me be very clear here, we will not be discussing this during the meeting in 
May.

Repeated assertions do not make a thing true and at this point everyone is very 
clear on your opinion of Spamhaus. I will ask you directly to cease these kinds 
of emails to the list. This is the last time I hope I have to say this.

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: Elad Cohen 
Sent: Monday 20 April 2020 10:11
To: Brian Nisbet; anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: Call For Agenda Items RIPE 80

CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


Hello Brian,

I have a matter that I would like to raise:

The anti-abuse illegal anonymous organization "The Spamhaus Project" and how it 
is damaging and hurting many businesses worldwide, how the contacts of that 
illegal anonymous organizations are part of the anti-abuse community (including 
in this working group like Richard D G Cox was) and how they are violating 
global privacy laws with the support of LEA's - all of it in illegal way 
according to the LEA's countries and according to the following presentation of 
"The Spamhaus Project":

https://www.scribd.com/document/445894312/Spamhaus-Illegal-Private-Data-Violation<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.scribd.com%2Fdocument%2F445894312%2FSpamhaus-Illegal-Private-Data-Violation&data=02%7C01%7Cbrian.nisbet%40heanet.ie%7C40da683e73a74aa47a7f08d7e50ad55e%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637229707021490189&sdata=FRYOtS2YOdR7mbCRzPZY6XIyYhhUi1UAJ2BWWmiTwOc%3D&reserved=0>

---

Besides it, there is another matter of "The Spamhaus Project" not being 
regulated and supervised by any country/government/LEA - in this way members of 
"The Spamhaus Project" can abuse it for their own benefits, for example the 
criminal which is the owner of the twitter account 
https://twitter.com/underthebreach<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Funderthebreach&data=02%7C01%7Cbrian.nisbet%40heanet.ie%7C40da683e73a74aa47a7f08d7e50ad55e%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637229707021490189&sdata=8ulNyrx0SdD0zO0Qq4nDHvEA5d8Aqi2%2FHyKd3hF3tG8%3D&reserved=0>
 and is part of "The Spamhaus Project", for example Laura Atkins from 
WordToTheWise 
(https://wordtothewise.com/<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwordtothewise.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cbrian.nisbet%40heanet.ie%7C40da683e73a74aa47a7f08d7e50ad55e%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637229707021500188&sdata=ZdxcdA1R6A4VoDdTSs0L6RU6AmK%2B5qyh9LFypvv8dck%3D&reserved=0>)
 which is selling a Spamhaus listing removal service, for example members of 
"The Spamhaus Project" which are working in email delivery companies and "The 
Spamhaus Project" is attacking their competitors.

---

Another matter that I would like to raise is the use of profiling in the 
anti-abuse community including in "The Spamhaus Project", profiling is being 
used by dumb people that don't know how to their work otherwise, it is the 
"easy" (and to my opinion - highly illegal) way. The anti-abuse community 
should raise its voice against any kind of profiling being done by the illegal 
anonymous organization "The Spamhaus Project".

Respectfully,
Elad


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Brian Nisbet 

Sent: Monday, April 20, 2020 11:08 AM
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: [anti-abuse-wg] Call For Agenda Items RIPE 80

Colleagues,

As you are all no doubt aware RIPE 80 will be an online only meeting.

This is a new departure for us all, but significant preparation has already 
been done and I'm really looking forward to a great event.

The Anti-Abuse WG has a slot from 10:00 - 10:45 CEST on Thursday 14th May. If 
you have any matters you'd like to raise, please let me know as soon as 
possible.

And remember, you need to register for RIPE 80. You can do so, free of charge, 
here:

https://ripe80.ripe.net/attend/register/<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fripe80.ripe.net%2Fattend%2Fregister%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cbrian.nisbet%40heanet.ie%7C40da683e73a74aa47a7f08d7e50ad55e%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637229707021500188&sdata=aIrgfJsl9e5dcMx40bwT26KuwEvpkXk8VkRJ2ixDo18%3D&reserved=0>

Thanks,

Brian

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's 

[anti-abuse-wg] Second Call for Agenda Items - AA-WG @ RIPE80

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

RIPE 80 will be taking place in Berlin from the 11th - 15th May. All of the 
details about the meeting can be found here:

https://ripe80.ripe.net/

The Anti-Abuse Working Group session is currently timetabled for 09:00 CEST on 
Thursday 14th May.

If you would like to raise anything at the meeting, propose a work item for the 
WG, discuss any topics or present on any relevant items, then please email 
aa-wg-ch...@ripe.net

Currently we will have some policy discussion (more on that very soon!), but 
there is still some time available for other matters.

Thanks,

Brian

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Discussion Phase (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")

[Brian Nisbet]

I will interject here and say that the WG exists because of the community, not 
the NCC. There may be perceived hair splitting here, but it is important.

Obviously 2019-04 does directly ask the NCC to take an action, but we aren't 
here because of that organisation, we're here because we care about the 
operation of the Internet.

As to why we're having this discussion again, it's because the Co-Chairs judged 
that a sufficient portion of the Working Group wanted us to and I think the 
conversation so far has proven that judgement to be correct.

There may be intractable issues here, it's possible we're even asking the wrong 
questions and certainly we would love to hear from voices that haven't been 
active in this conversation before, in addition to those who have. This isn't a 
simple problem, for a variety of reasons, including that 70+ country, 20,000+ 
members consideration, but remember, Jordi isn't the only person who can 
propose policies or policy changes and I would encourage others to think about 
other questions we could ask?

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Suresh 
Ramasubramanian 
Sent: Thursday 30 April 2020 14:07
To: Sascha Luck [ml] ; anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 

Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Discussion Phase (Validation of 
"abuse-mailbox")


CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


What would get discussed in an anti abuse wg? All the reasons why the 
organisation due to which the wg exists must sit on their thumbs and do nothing 
about abuse?

--srs

From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Sascha Luck 
[ml] 
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2020 6:31:11 PM
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Discussion Phase (Validation of 
"abuse-mailbox")

On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 12:42:09PM +, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
>RIPE NCC need not decide whether a behaviour is legal or not in order to 
>prohibit use of resources that it allocates for such behaviour.
>
>Wearing a T-shirt, shorts and flip flops is perfectly legal and yet you can be 
>refused entry into a fancy restaurant if you wear them.
>
>Nobody gets to sue the restaurant for refusing admission by claiming that 
>tshirts and flip flops are perfectly legal attire, and even nudity is legal in 
>some parts of Europe (German topless and nude beaches say).

If this restaurant were the only source of food in a region, it
would damn well be illegal to refuse service no matter how (or
if) the client is dressed.

Why are we havijg thjis discussion yet again?

rgds,
Sascha Luck

>
>--srs
>
>From: Nick Hilliard 
>Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2020 5:43:04 PM
>To: Suresh Ramasubramanian 
>Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
>Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Discussion Phase (Validation of 
>"abuse-mailbox")
>
>Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote on 30/04/2020 01:58:
>> Why would I ask about something I am posting as an individual in my
>> personal capacity?
>
>because your day job involves abuse / security and in that capacity you
>may have access to good quality legal resources.
>
>> I see great pains being taken to have NCC stay hands off and arms length
>> from abuse issues at its members. I understand the motivation.
>>
>> However, being in a fiduciary role - with IPv4 being traded like
>> currency these days the description fits - RIPE NCC can’t not get involved.
>>
>> I am concerned that this is eventually going to lead to heavy handed
>> state regulation if a regulator gets involved after some particularly
>> egregious misbehaviour by a (hypothetical at this point but the risk
>> exists or might even exist now) shell company that gets itself
>> membership, even LIR status and then uses a large allocation of IPs
>> exclusively for crime.
>>
>> NCC owes it to the rest of its membership and the internet community at
>> large to take a more active role in this matter.
>>
>> Though those of us that are saying this are probably voices in the
>> wilderness at this point.
>
>Couple of general observations:
>
>- internet abuse is a specific instance of general societal abuse. It's
>a complex problem and one where punishment / the threat of punishment is
>one of many methods of handling it, and arguably no

[anti-abuse-wg] Draft Agenda, Anti-Abuse Working Group Meeting @ RIPE80

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

Here is the draft agenda for our session at 10:00 CEST on Thursday 14th May.

We have a 45 minute session, so there may be time for other discussion/items, 
but keeping to that time will be very important. Please let the Co-Chairs know 
if you have any additions.

A. Administrative Matters

* Welcome
* Scribe, Jabber, Stenography
* Chat Etiquette
* Approve Minutes from RIPE 79
* Finalise agenda

B. Update

* B1. Recent List Discussion

C. Policies -

 *C.1. Policy Proposal 2019-04 - Validation of "abuse-mailbox", Jordi Palet 
Martinez, The IPv6 Company


X. A.O.B.

Z. Agenda for RIPE 81


Brian,
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Spamming LIR accounts

[Brian Nisbet]

As Nick points out, the clearest violation, if there is one, would be the terms 
of service of the RIPE DB. There may be others, that would be somewhat up to 
your local laws and how you would like to pursue things.

Should anyone believe they have been spammed by someone who they believe has 
harvested contact details from the DB, then they should contact ab...@ripe.net 
to report it.

Handily there are rules in place for this, should it ever happen...

Thanks,

Brian


Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Nick Hilliard 

Sent: Thursday 7 May 2020 10:26
To: Töma Gavrichenkov
Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Spamming LIR accounts

CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


Töma Gavrichenkov wrote on 07/05/2020 10:03:
> What does GDPR have to say about this?

You mean the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations / PECR.
Spamming is prohibited under article 13.

National transcriptions of this legislation have implemented this as a
civil offence in some EU countries and a criminal offence in others.

Note that this mainly applies to personal accounts, not role accounts.

In any event, spamming using contact information harvested from the RIPE
database is a violation of the terms of use of the RIPE Database:

> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ripe.net%2Fmanage-ips-and-asns%2Fdb%2Fsupport%2Fdocumentation%2Fterms&data=02%7C01%7Cbrian.nisbet%40heanet.ie%7Cd1651da6e1604bdd622508d7f268c761%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637244404157367052&sdata=j82XJG9%2FV7PXHxJIq7KxxyVLFolK9P8lXgN3rV%2B5kA0%3D&reserved=0

specifically:

> Users may not use the RIPE Database or the data contained therein for
> advertising, direct marketing, marketing research or similar
> purposes.

Nick

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Spamming LIR accounts

[Brian Nisbet]

Ah, let me be very clear here...

I was explicitly *not* saying that we shouldn't discuss such things on this 
list, with due care and attention. Apologies if it came across that way. I need 
to flag which hat I'm wearing better!

I was saying "thankfully, we have a process for this". In the early part of any 
such incident I would certainly not expect an immediate response from the NCC 
with anything more than process, albeit as a member I would hope for something 
more later, as we have seen from them before.

Brian
(Who wasn't speaking as Co-Chair in his last email and is continuing not to in 
this one.)

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: Töma Gavrichenkov 
Sent: Thursday 7 May 2020 11:52
To: Brian Nisbet
Cc: Nick Hilliard; anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Spamming LIR accounts

CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


Peace,

On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 12:51 PM Brian Nisbet  wrote:
> Should anyone believe they have been spammed by
> someone who they believe has harvested contact
> details from the DB, then they should contact
> ab...@ripe.net to report it.

No.

I mean, yes, but I also think it is necessary to raise the concern
here, because either such spamming is allowed by RIPE policies (and
then every other candidate has their rights to do the same), or it is
forbidden (and thus one candidate has just obtained unfair advantage,
for which there should be consequences).

What does NCC have to say here?

--
Töma

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Spamming LIR accounts

[Brian Nisbet]

Max,

The NCC Exec Board elections are governed by the NCC Articles of Association 
etc. It is through that vehicle that any changes would be made.

The PDP is not a suitable vehicle for that. Certainly I think I can say with 
some certainty that it would not be something suitable for this WG, nor would I 
believe it would be suitable for any other.

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Max Tulyev 

Sent: Thursday 7 May 2020 14:47
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Spamming LIR accounts

CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


Hi,

sorry, we have no policy to kick off dirty spammer from elections. I
think it is time to do that. Let's do.

Who can write a PDP document for this?

07.05.20 12:03, Töma Gavrichenkov пише:
> Peace,
>
> Okay, should I be the first to step in and say that spamming all the
> LIR accounts with one's mind-boggingly stupid "technical solutions"
> that have no, 0, zero chances to be implemented on the Internet is
> completely irresponsible and grossly unacceptable behaviour?
>
> What does GDPR have to say about this?
>
> --
> Töma
>

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] About "consensus" and "voting"...

[Brian Nisbet]

All,

I think Randy has written this very clearly. That said, I am happy to discuss 
the concepts, and why the RIPE Community cleaves to them, with people, either 
on or off list.

The RIPE WGs, AA-WG included, have made policy and changed things over the 
years through this method. It's not perfect, nothing involving humans is, but 
policies have reached consensus, change has been effected, and I believe that 
will continue. Consensus is a great way to achieve that. And it's very 
important to remember that one voice can't stop that change just by objecting, 
in the same way one voice can't effect change just by repeatedly asking for it, 
if there is not consensus.

As Nick points out, there have been policies to which people objected, but 
those policies reached consensus, because the community and the Chairs adjudged 
that those objections had been addressed.

If there is ever a future where the RIPE Community changes our way of policy 
development then it will be a Community effort to make that change, and the 
AA-WG Co-Chairs have no intention of even attempting to suggest an exception 
for 2019-04.

Thank you all for your continued involvement,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Randy Bush 

Sent: Saturday 9 May 2020 19:36
To: "Sérgio Rocha" 
Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] About "consensus" and "voting"...

CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


> Otherwise we change the way the working Groups works it will remain
> unchanged for ever. I agree that we must get a way to vote or another
> democratic way to get decisions.

the goals of the ripe community are stewardship and cooperation, not
voting, deciding, and "getting things done."  you can look at the
current us govt for a great example of why not.

if we can not come to consensus on something, then we are patient.
and that's ok.  we move as a cooperative community and that takes
time.

yes, this becomes more complex as the community scales and becomes
more diverse.  and we want diversity and wide representation.  so
ever more patience is needed; not the means to rush to judgment.

for a large segment of the community, and that which was pretty much
the original population, there is an underlying physics and shared
experience of moving packets, routing, circuits, bgp, ixen, ... that
gives us a common experience and understanding.

as we become more diverse, the physics of that shared experience and
understanding weakens.  so cooperative/consensus decision making is
more complex and takes longer.  welcome to a larger and mode diverse
community.  this is good.

but we are stewards of one internet.

it took eight, yes eight, years for me to get the ietf to change a
constant from 4k to 64k (rfc 8654).  so my sense of urgency may be a
little different than that of others.

randy

[anti-abuse-wg] Elad Cohen: Moderation & Responses

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

We would greatly prefer not to be writing this email, but it felt more wrong 
not to.

You will have noticed that Elad Cohen has continued to successfully send emails 
to the list by creating new email addresses. This is, of course, easy, 
especially if you are determined. It is also against certainly the spirit of 
being placed in moderation and shows an unwillingness to abide by the Community 
code of conduct.

While the Co-Chairs, with the invaluable support of the NCC staff, will 
continue to try to moderate the list when needed, and guided by that code of 
conduct, we would ask simply that people do not interact with Elad Cohen on 
list. What you do elsewhere is outside of our remit, as it should be, but we do 
not see any merit to these conversations on the AA-WG mailing list.

Thank you all,

Alireza, Brian, Tobias
Co-Chairs, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

[anti-abuse-wg] Draft Minutes - AA-WG @ RIPE80

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

Please find attached the draft minutes from our working group session at RIPE 
80.

Could you let the Co-Chairs know, by Friday 17th July, if there are any errors 
or omissions?

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270
Anti-Abuse Working Group
Thursday, 14 May 10:00 - 10:45
Chairs: Alireza Vaziri, Brian Nisbet
Scribe: Alun Davies

A. Administrative Matters

B. Update

C. Policies

C.1. Policy Proposal 2019-04 - Validation of "abuse-mailbox"
Jordi Palet Martinez, The IPv6 Company

Michele Neylon (Blacknight) commented that larger providers use forms, so you 
cannot oblige them to change their processes because it’s “easier” for 
you. 

Carlos Friacas (CSIRT) responded to this, pointing out that forms are not 
automation-friendly. Even if there is no "forcing" someone to change their 
processes, having it somehow marked on whois/rdap would help automated systems 
(which are operationally in need for updated contacts) to decide not to send a 
message that will certainly bounce.

Jordi responded that he thinks it is clear that people believe forms are 
automation, but they are not. If this were the case, 25000 LIRs would have a 
form, which would be impossible to automate. This can't be changed. 

Peter Hessler (KLEO Connect GmbH) asked, if there is no obligation to react to 
abuse reports, then what is the point of this proposal? Is the goal primarily 
to collect statistics?

Jordi agreed that they want to keep the existing policy in place. He disagreed 
with the suggestion that there will be no obligation to react to abuse reports. 
He added that this is an ongoing discussion, but if this reporting is not 
available, then regulators may ask for an alternative, which is something to 
consider. Brian added that, in talking about what would happen if regulators 
appear, there is a need to find the right line between the risk of that and the 
impact of it on the relevant policies.

Carlos Friacas (CSIRT) asked whether it would be possible for someone to 
provide a gateway from e-mail messages to the most popular forms of the larger 
providers. Some kind of middleware.

Jordi thought this would be useful. But not quickly enough updated every time 
an ISP creates a new form or updates it. Maybe it's better to consider asking 
for a standard. No more emails or anything like that. He added that there is 
not that much of a higher cost to this than processing emails, so it could work.

Carlos Friacas directed a question to Peter Hessler, asking whether he sends 
abuse complaints when receiving spam, or has it automated, or approaches it on 
a case by case basis. Peter responded that he manually sends out abuse reports 
to a variety of sources.  Some handle it, but many of the large ones (Yahoo, 
especially) do not.

Brian added that there's no expectation that this proposal will suddenly make 
things magically better, forcing everyone to deal with spam correctly.

Tobias Knecht (Abusix, Inc., speaking for himself), said that the burden of 
reporting abuse can not be put on the reporter/victim of the abuse.

Jordi said this is something stated in the proposal. The cost cannot be on the 
victims. Even if we escalate this to the whole internet community, no one will 
support that.

Niall O’Reilly (Tolerant Networks Ltd, speaking for himself) asked if 
“standard form” or “API” would be a target for a BCP?

Jordi, having said he discussed this in the list last summer, said he did not 
think so. Although it is possible they missed something, he believes that what 
is there right now is sufficient. He said that if someone can tell them what is 
missing, they can start the work in the IETF. 

Michele Neylon (Blacknight) said that, while I understand your frustration with 
forms, you cannot force “one size fits all”. You also forget that for some 
of us our “abuse” ingress is dealing with a wide variety of types of abuse. 
It’s not just network abuse. For smaller providers implementing F-AXR, it is 
not going to work.

Brian said this goes back to the definition of abuse, and that the conversation 
had gotten a lot broader than than just network abuse at this point in time.

Jordi said he thinks it will work because smaller providers use more and more 
Open Source tools and it's very common to use Fail2ban. He uses it himself, and 
it takes a couple of hours to implement that. So, he disagreed, but pointed out 
there there are lots of different opinions on the matter.


A.J. Wolski (Netrunner Labs) asked for Jordi and Brian's opinion on whether the 
NCC would be the place to report abuse.

Speaking as co-chair and member of NCC, Brian said, if he saw a proposal tha

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Draft Minutes - AA-WG @ RIPE80

[Brian Nisbet]

Thank you.

However I should be clear, this was not an attempt to start a new thread on the 
proposal, rather to check the minutes of the WG session.

The Co-Chairs, along with Jordi, have decided that 2019-04 will go forward to 
review phase, while noting all of the comments both for and against, as this 
will allow for an NCC Impact Analysis to further inform the discussion.

I would ask that all members of the WG hold off on further comment until the IA 
is prepared.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of PP 

Sent: Tuesday 7 July 2020 09:33
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Draft Minutes - AA-WG @ RIPE80


CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


The complaint to RIPE mechanism should only be an escalation mechanism when the 
ISP does not respond.


The cost of dealing with the investigation by RIPE should be passed on to the 
irresponsibly resource holder who did not properly respond to the abuse 
complaint.


On 7/07/2020 6:26 pm, Brian Nisbet wrote:


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie<mailto:brian.nis...@heanet.ie> 
www.heanet.ie<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heanet.ie%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C6bfc929510c640ff394c08d822508947%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637297076602380446&sdata=ee%2Bv6sn7achK6q7FhVkfWOlbzkOHVFWrNfxv0oRLqiw%3D&reserved=0>

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Fwd: Re: botnet controllers

[Brian Nisbet]

Angel,

Thank you for this, a very useful prompt!

Brian


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Angel 
Fernandez Pineda 
Sent: Thursday 9 July 2020 08:16
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Fwd: Re: botnet controllers


CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


Hi,
I would like to make a recommendation to all of you. The EU has opened a 
consultation on the Digital Service Act, a future regulation that aims to 
review the role of digital platforms and technoly intermediaries and establish 
regulations to protect the rights of users and companies that operate online 
wherever is required. Of course, the role of ISPs or organizations like RIPE 
NCC can be subject to asses.

The aim of the European Commission with the consultation is to identify 
situations that put at risk the safety and rights of users or the rights of 
companies to compete in a fair market.

To those of you who know that this discussion, repeated so many times in this 
WG, will not reach to anything, I would like to invite you to dedicate a little 
of your time to answering the consultation. You will find it at:

https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12417-Digital-Services-Act-deepening-the-Internal-Market-and-clarifying-responsibilities-for-digital-services/public-consultation<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fec.europa.eu%2Finfo%2Flaw%2Fbetter-regulation%2Fhave-your-say%2Finitiatives%2F12417-Digital-Services-Act-deepening-the-Internal-Market-and-clarifying-responsibilities-for-digital-services%2Fpublic-consultation&data=02%7C01%7C%7C7bf6cb706d5e48b22dc008d823d80370%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637298758391658981&sdata=LacRZpFsgQqCcAOQ%2Bzhu64d0ob463OO9IC7MJeXOAMQ%3D&reserved=0>

Best,
ángel
Grupo Godó de Comunicación


De: anti-abuse-wg  en nombre de Serge Droz via 
anti-abuse-wg 
Enviado: jueves, 9 de julio de 2020 8:29
Para: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Asunto: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Fwd: Re: botnet controllers

Hi Info

Maybe one of the reasons some Non-logging VPNs end up on blacklist sis
that the Non-Looging phrase is just an excuse to not go after misuse.
The rights to privacy and free speech do not mean anything goes.

You can fight abuse without violating privacy. But of course that's not
for free, you need abuse people that investigate and they cost money.
Sadly, many of these VPNs frankly just don't care, using the lame excuse
that they are protecting fundamental rights, when in fact they are just
don't care or take responsibility.

I don't agree with everything Spamhaus does, but I find them responsible
and and always found a way way to talk to them.

I was reluctant writing this, because I'm not sure this discussion will
lead anywhere. It's one of these where opinions seem to already have
been formed.

But you start accusing people of posting anonymously. I totally agree
this is bad, but then, who are you, i...@fos-vpn.org?

You don't seem to offer a name yourself. I find this a bit hypocritical.

Best
Serge


On 08.07.20 20:46, i...@fos-vpn.org wrote:
> All I would like from Spamhaus is to stop publishing fake SBL records in
> order to discredit us and to use that to put pressure both upon us and
> our upstreams.
> Non-logging VPN services are as legal within the EU as Exit Nodes of the
> Tor Network (which have massive abuse entries in various data bases,
> especially the larger ones) and public WiFi Hotspots, which can be used
> for abusive activities, too.
>
> I don't know who "PP" is (probably the same person which posts under the
> nickname "Petras Simeon" on Twitter and on various boards), but he
> contacted us and our upstream providers without telling his name, just
> using this email address: phishphuc...@storey.ovh and sending us the
> list of SBL entries which he also posted here.
> Don't know if he's working for Spamhaus or not, but before attacking
> others publicly, people should reveal their true identity, anything else
> would be sneaky in my opinion.
>

--
Dr. Serge Droz
Chair of the FIRST Board of Directors
https://www.first.org<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.first.org%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C7bf6cb706d5e48b22dc008d823d80370%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637298758391658981&sdata=4n5ae2kX7r4qSW5BmJuMUKaHLTbetjhaeFodXh%2FLQb8%3D&reserved=0>

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Fwd: Re: botnet controllers

[Brian Nisbet]

Serge, all,

Elad Cohen is still under moderation on this WG and every mail is being 
reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Right now, his emails only reach the list if 
someone replies to them, copying the list, so I will repeat our request that 
people not do that, please.

If you wish to report any communication to the list, please contact the 
Co-Chairs at aa-wg-ch...@ripe.net

The Co-Chairs have noted this email. We agree it contravenes the Community 
guidelines and Code of Conduct and will be taking further action.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Serge Droz 
via anti-abuse-wg 
Sent: Thursday 9 July 2020 14:32
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Fwd: Re: botnet controllers

CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


Hello @Moderators

Can you please suspend this participant? I take offense at this. We may
disagree on issues and opinions. However I feel there is no space for
name calling.

Best regards
Serge




On 09.07.20 15:16, Elad Cohen wrote:
> Michele how more bigger asshole you can be to be the puppet of spamhaus
> so you will be able monetize your connections with them to more $$$
>
> You are a loser and you are a disgraceful businessman and you are a
> disgrace to the whole internet community
> 
> *From:* anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of
> Michele Neylon - Blacknight 
> *Sent:* Thursday, July 9, 2020 4:02 PM
> *To:* Serge Droz ; anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net
> 
> *Subject:* Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Fwd: Re: botnet controllers
>
> +1 on all points
>
> That someone who won't even disclose who they are has the gall to demand
> that Spamhaus or anyone else should is hilarious and disturbing.
>
>
>
> --
> Mr Michele Neylon
>
> Blacknight Solutions
>
> Hosting, Colocation & Domains
>
> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.blacknight.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C582a216f9425452c2ff108d8240c7e4b%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637298983383420558&sdata=mWZajcgnf2SlPOQeNBhszWJmCBYZV0Ee2Ma2Lrky4eA%3D&reserved=0
> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fblacknight.blog%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C582a216f9425452c2ff108d8240c7e4b%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637298983383420558&sdata=YU3IkWHTh8RiqIB7Hx0STgjwy3TBnMaIxRgMatZBZ%2B8%3D&reserved=0
>  /
>
> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fceo.hosting%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C582a216f9425452c2ff108d8240c7e4b%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637298983383420558&sdata=JaayCpznD9AJAYil4HMgXaXme9ywVp27de07uFhSz6w%3D&reserved=0
>
> Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
>
> Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
>
> ---
>
> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,
> Sleaty Road, Graiguecullen, Carlow, R93 X265,Ireland  Company No.: 370845
>
> On 09/07/2020, 07:30, "anti-abuse-wg on behalf of Serge Droz via
> anti-abuse-wg"  anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net> wrote:
>
> Hi Info
>
> Maybe one of the reasons some Non-logging VPNs end up on blacklist sis
> that the Non-Looging phrase is just an excuse to not go after misuse.
> The rights to privacy and free speech do not mean anything goes.
>
> You can fight abuse without violating privacy. But of course that's not
> for free, you need abuse people that investigate and they cost money.
> Sadly, many of these VPNs frankly just don't care, using the lame excuse
> that they are protecting fundamental rights, when in fact they are just
> don't care or take responsibility.
>
> I don't agree with everything Spamhaus does, but I find them responsible
> and and always found a way way to talk to them.
>
> I was reluctant writing this, because I'm not sure this discussion will
> lead anywhere. It's one of these where opinions seem to already have
> been formed.
>
> But you start accusing people of posting anonymously. I totally agree
> this is bad, but then, who are you, i...@fos-vpn.org?
>
> You don't seem to offer a name yourself. I find this a bit hypocritical.
>
> Best
> Serge
>
>
> On 08.07.20 20:46, i...@fos-vpn.org wrote:
> >

[anti-abuse-wg] First Call For Agenda Items - AA-WG @ RIPE81

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

RIPE 81 will be taking place somewhere on the Internet from the 27th - 30th 
October 2020.

https://ripe81.ripe.net

The Anti-Abuse WG will be meeting and Alireza, Tobias and I would invite people 
to submit topics for discussion,  presentations for general enlightenment and, 
of course, work items for the working group.

The session will likely be short as per RIPE80, but we'll confirm that closer 
to the time.

As always you can reach us at aa-wg-ch...@ripe.net

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG

Brian Nisbet
Service Operations Manager
HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network
1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland
+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie
Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

[anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Review Phase (Validation of "abuse-mailbox") Reminder

[Brian Nisbet]

Folks,

Just to remind you all, the current Review Phase is formally due to end 
tomorrow. If you haven't, then now is an excellent opportunity to look at 
Petrit's email from the 22nd of July and to read the Impact Analysis from the 
NCC and make any comments you wish to make.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

[anti-abuse-wg] 2nd Call For Agenda Items - AA-WG @ RIPE81

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

RIPE 81 will be taking place somewhere on the Internet from the 27th - 30th 
October 2020.

https://ripe81.ripe.net<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fripe81.ripe.net%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C3cb4d414ce8c48a380c608d8296de8d9%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637304899326225831&sdata=WDjqNjaaX4fs%2BUbB8mo4IpZmD1y%2BXzFuc1VjJfuRzxM%3D&reserved=0>

The Anti-Abuse WG will be meeting and Alireza, Tobias and I would invite people 
to submit topics for discussion,  presentations for general enlightenment and, 
of course, work items for the working group.

The session will is currently scheduled for 45 minutes, as it was at RIPE80.

As always you can reach us at aa-wg-ch...@ripe.net

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

[anti-abuse-wg] Report & Co-Chair's Decision on Proposal 2019-04

[Brian Nisbet]

ed failure of any kind of 
consensus from the working group, the Co-Chairs have decided to withdraw this 
proposal. As always we would welcome proposals on this and other matters, 
however we do not feel that there is any likelihood of 2019-04, regardless of 
possible edits, reaching consensus in the short or medium term.

Alireza, Brian, Tobias
Co-Chairs, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Report & Co-Chair's Decision on Proposal 2019-04

[Brian Nisbet]

Thank you for the clarification, Suresh.

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Suresh 
Ramasubramanian 
Sent: Monday 7 September 2020 16:32
To: JJS JJS ; anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 

Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Report & Co-Chair's Decision on Proposal 2019-04


CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


A bit too late to the party but I was in support, I am sorry I wasn’t clear

--srs

From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of JJS JJS 

Sent: Monday, September 7, 2020 8:57:14 PM
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Report & Co-Chair's Decision on Proposal 2019-04

That fact that you classify my email as being on the "no" argument, shows how 
misguided you are.

Not for one second was I against this proposal, just the point about mandating 
emails.

There is no consensus "against" this proposal.

Your methodology of surveying views is so warped, it is unbelievable.

--


On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 1:19 AM Brian Nisbet 
mailto:brian.nis...@heanet.ie>> wrote:
Colleagues,

A few weeks ago we reached the end of the latest review phase for 2019-04. The 
Co-Chairs have worked closely with the NCC Policy Development Office since then 
to try to make a decision on this policy. This email contains a report on the 
Discussion Phase and Review Phase and then a final decision which, we believe, 
is supported by the activity during those phases.

As always, this is underpinned by the RIPE PDP - 
https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-710<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ripe.net%2Fpublications%2Fdocs%2Fripe-710&data=02%7C01%7C%7C3dcd3df8a62b412eb48808d853434240%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637350895635519057&sdata=ORTXYJtqaJnEi9%2B4fcexmd5gbV1ERj2r0Roh7gwc6Fc%3D&reserved=0>

Discussion Phase:

There was some clear support for the policy during the Discussion Phase. This 
came from:

Serge Droz, who felt that it would help in a number of cases and that an 
inability to answer an e-mail every six month probably indicated underlying 
issues. He also felt it would allow the community to understand who was doing 
good work and who wasn't, and it will prevent organisations from saying they 
never received a report. He also pointed out some of the difference in reaction 
between the security and operator communities on this policy.

Carlos Friacas, agreed that it would help, but not solve all problems. He also 
flagged that if "deregistration" was not a possible outcome for a continuous 
failure to validate, then the outcome of transparency would still be positive, 
but did say that must be balanced against the NCC Impact Analysis.

Jordi Palet Martinez, the proposer, was, of course, in favour, but also reacted 
to a number of voices against the proposal:
- The job of the RIPE NCC is to implement the policies agreed by the community. 
 I believe is perfectly understandable the need to avoid using manual forms 
which don't follow a single standard, which means extra work for *everyone*. 
(Responding to Nick Hilliard)
-  The actual policy has a bigger level of micro-management, by setting one 
year and not allowing the NCC to change that. (Responding to Nick Hilliard)
- The problem of a form is that is not standard. This is economically 
non-sustainable and means that the cost of the abuse cases is on the back of 
the one actually reporting. (Responding to No No)
- The actual validation is not working, it is just a technical validation 
(responding to Gert Doering)
- The community prefers to do things in steps, we initially asked for an abuse 
mailbox, we then added a technical validation, now we are asking for a better 
validation. I am not asking to verify if you handle abuse case or not and I am 
not asking to take any new actions.

Angel Gonzalez Berdasco suuported the proposal, but also made multiple comments 
on a different approach, including an abuse-uri and highlighted that 
standarising the communications was important.

A number of people spoke in clear opposition.

Nick Hilliard stated that it is not the job of the RIPE NCC to tell its members 
how to handle abuse reports. He further said that the is self-contradictory, 
intrusive into NCC membership business processes and there is no compelling 
reason to believe that the proposal will end up reducing the amount of abuse on 
the internet.

Gert Doering said that if people *do not want* to handle abuse reports, th

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Report & Co-Chair's Decision on Proposal 2019-04

[Brian Nisbet]

Thank you for the clarification, albeit I would ask you not to launch into 
attacks when doing so.

Even given that I do not believe it makes any difference to the overall 
decision from the Co-Chairs.

I would suggest that you look at the resources on 
https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies which explain the various phases.

Equally, the comments made during the Discussion Phase were taken into account.

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of JJS JJS 

Sent: Monday 7 September 2020 16:27
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Report & Co-Chair's Decision on Proposal 2019-04


CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


That fact that you classify my email as being on the "no" argument, shows how 
misguided you are.

Not for one second was I against this proposal, just the point about mandating 
emails.

There is no consensus "against" this proposal.

Your methodology of surveying views is so warped, it is unbelievable.

--


On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 1:19 AM Brian Nisbet 
mailto:brian.nis...@heanet.ie>> wrote:
Colleagues,

A few weeks ago we reached the end of the latest review phase for 2019-04. The 
Co-Chairs have worked closely with the NCC Policy Development Office since then 
to try to make a decision on this policy. This email contains a report on the 
Discussion Phase and Review Phase and then a final decision which, we believe, 
is supported by the activity during those phases.

As always, this is underpinned by the RIPE PDP - 
https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-710<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ripe.net%2Fpublications%2Fdocs%2Fripe-710&data=02%7C01%7C%7C52743e2d79214186604e08d8534291ff%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637350892677909839&sdata=5AZsDBvQNpP7S%2Brm07cWbqf2buJv33M%2BRA2HtZwDCgI%3D&reserved=0>

Discussion Phase:

There was some clear support for the policy during the Discussion Phase. This 
came from:

Serge Droz, who felt that it would help in a number of cases and that an 
inability to answer an e-mail every six month probably indicated underlying 
issues. He also felt it would allow the community to understand who was doing 
good work and who wasn't, and it will prevent organisations from saying they 
never received a report. He also pointed out some of the difference in reaction 
between the security and operator communities on this policy.

Carlos Friacas, agreed that it would help, but not solve all problems. He also 
flagged that if "deregistration" was not a possible outcome for a continuous 
failure to validate, then the outcome of transparency would still be positive, 
but did say that must be balanced against the NCC Impact Analysis.

Jordi Palet Martinez, the proposer, was, of course, in favour, but also reacted 
to a number of voices against the proposal:
- The job of the RIPE NCC is to implement the policies agreed by the community. 
 I believe is perfectly understandable the need to avoid using manual forms 
which don't follow a single standard, which means extra work for *everyone*. 
(Responding to Nick Hilliard)
-  The actual policy has a bigger level of micro-management, by setting one 
year and not allowing the NCC to change that. (Responding to Nick Hilliard)
- The problem of a form is that is not standard. This is economically 
non-sustainable and means that the cost of the abuse cases is on the back of 
the one actually reporting. (Responding to No No)
- The actual validation is not working, it is just a technical validation 
(responding to Gert Doering)
- The community prefers to do things in steps, we initially asked for an abuse 
mailbox, we then added a technical validation, now we are asking for a better 
validation. I am not asking to verify if you handle abuse case or not and I am 
not asking to take any new actions.

Angel Gonzalez Berdasco suuported the proposal, but also made multiple comments 
on a different approach, including an abuse-uri and highlighted that 
standarising the communications was important.

A number of people spoke in clear opposition.

Nick Hilliard stated that it is not the job of the RIPE NCC to tell its members 
how to handle abuse reports. He further said that the is self-contradictory, 
intrusive into NCC membership business processes and there is no compelling 
reason to believe that the proposal will end up reducing the amount of abuse on 
the internet.

Gert Doering said that if people *do not

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Report & Co-Chair's Decision on Proposal 2019-04

[Brian Nisbet]

As you will see in the report, we made mention of comments for, against and 
uncertain in both the Discussion Phase and the Review Phase. We took all of 
this into account in making our decision.

Even with your clarification of support in the Discussion Phase it still does 
not point at consensus being reached for this proposal.

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of JJS JJS 

Sent: Tuesday 8 September 2020 00:31
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Report & Co-Chair's Decision on Proposal 2019-04


CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


I am disputing your methodology in determining consensus.

If I didn't know that you expected me to offer support for this proposal, 
neither did anyone else.



___


On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 1:36 AM Brian Nisbet 
mailto:brian.nis...@heanet.ie>> wrote:
Thank you for the clarification, albeit I would ask you not to launch into 
attacks when doing so.

Even given that I do not believe it makes any difference to the overall 
decision from the Co-Chairs.

I would suggest that you look at the resources on 
https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ripe.net%2Fparticipate%2Fpolicies&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cbf540183a2214c1656c408d8538647a8%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637351183483775754&sdata=B68JAV6pZFtYim09Izj28qJRrBbXbQkzqAYjfq932fg%3D&reserved=0>
 which explain the various phases.

Equally, the comments made during the Discussion Phase were taken into account.

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie<mailto:brian.nis...@heanet.ie> 
www.heanet.ie<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heanet.ie%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cbf540183a2214c1656c408d8538647a8%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637351183483775754&sdata=T%2BjOKChsphuK6pErjsI%2FEnvd0fwZjn9v0e0XmlZQMdI%3D&reserved=0>

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg 
mailto:anti-abuse-wg-boun...@ripe.net>> on 
behalf of JJS JJS mailto:no0484...@gmail.com>>
Sent: Monday 7 September 2020 16:27
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net<mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net> 
mailto:anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net>>
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Report & Co-Chair's Decision on Proposal 2019-04


CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


That fact that you classify my email as being on the "no" argument, shows how 
misguided you are.

Not for one second was I against this proposal, just the point about mandating 
emails.

There is no consensus "against" this proposal.

Your methodology of surveying views is so warped, it is unbelievable.

--


On Tue, Sep 8, 2020 at 1:19 AM Brian Nisbet 
mailto:brian.nis...@heanet.ie>> wrote:
Colleagues,

A few weeks ago we reached the end of the latest review phase for 2019-04. The 
Co-Chairs have worked closely with the NCC Policy Development Office since then 
to try to make a decision on this policy. This email contains a report on the 
Discussion Phase and Review Phase and then a final decision which, we believe, 
is supported by the activity during those phases.

As always, this is underpinned by the RIPE PDP - 
https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-710<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ripe.net%2Fpublications%2Fdocs%2Fripe-710&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cbf540183a2214c1656c408d8538647a8%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637351183483785747&sdata=VFmoQCbyWqljrC%2B1woyecnU6Ne1UusYtFcCXhwjd%2B8w%3D&reserved=0>

Discussion Phase:

There was some clear support for the policy during the Discussion Phase. This 
came from:

Serge Droz, who felt that it would help in a number of cases and that an 
inability to answer an e-mail every six month probably indicated underlying 
issues. He also felt it would allow the community to understand who was doing 
good work and who wasn't, and it will prevent organisations from saying they 
never received a report. He also pointed out some of the difference in reaction 
between the security and opera

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Report & Co-Chair's Decision on Proposal 2019-04

[Brian Nisbet]

Jordi,

Under the PDP, given potential changes to the policy and inputs such as the 
Impact Analysis it is very difficult for the Co-Chairs to make assumptions 
about points of view as we move into the Review Phase, hence people will often 
restate their support or opposition to the policy, and indeed will often hark 
back to comments they have previously made.

Again, this is why we listed the comments from the Discussion Phase and the 
Co-Chairs feel, even if everyone had made those same comments, the Co-Chairs 
feel there was no clear consensus for change.

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ 
Sent: Tuesday 8 September 2020 08:58
To: Brian Nisbet ; anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 

Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Report & Co-Chair's Decision on Proposal 2019-04


CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


Hi Brian, all,



First of all, tks for this detailed report. I’m still processing it.



However, I’ve a open question for you, which I think it has been also clear 
from other emails, that it is not clear for the community.



People in favor (or against) the proposal has not (including myself), re-stated 
their position or repeated the same arguments. Is not that an indication that 
they keep their previous position?



Regards,

Jordi

@jordipalet







El 7/9/20 17:19, "anti-abuse-wg en nombre de Brian Nisbet" 
mailto:anti-abuse-wg-boun...@ripe.net> en 
nombre de brian.nis...@heanet.ie<mailto:brian.nis...@heanet.ie>> escribió:



Colleagues,



A few weeks ago we reached the end of the latest review phase for 2019-04. The 
Co-Chairs have worked closely with the NCC Policy Development Office since then 
to try to make a decision on this policy. This email contains a report on the 
Discussion Phase and Review Phase and then a final decision which, we believe, 
is supported by the activity during those phases.



As always, this is underpinned by the RIPE PDP - 
https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-710<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ripe.net%2Fpublications%2Fdocs%2Fripe-710&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb71da006ed9c4d959ecd08d853ccf27e%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637351487015681263&sdata=AUB6%2Fwxk5LC2U%2BmRK2KUOoDbNf0PpFdhAtZ16zCRnes%3D&reserved=0>



Discussion Phase:



There was some clear support for the policy during the Discussion Phase. This 
came from:



Serge Droz, who felt that it would help in a number of cases and that an 
inability to answer an e-mail every six month probably indicated underlying 
issues. He also felt it would allow the community to understand who was doing 
good work and who wasn't, and it will prevent organisations from saying they 
never received a report. He also pointed out some of the difference in reaction 
between the security and operator communities on this policy.



Carlos Friacas, agreed that it would help, but not solve all problems. He also 
flagged that if "deregistration" was not a possible outcome for a continuous 
failure to validate, then the outcome of transparency would still be positive, 
but did say that must be balanced against the NCC Impact Analysis.



Jordi Palet Martinez, the proposer, was, of course, in favour, but also reacted 
to a number of voices against the proposal:

- The job of the RIPE NCC is to implement the policies agreed by the community. 
 I believe is perfectly understandable the need to avoid using manual forms 
which don't follow a single standard, which means extra work for *everyone*. 
(Responding to Nick Hilliard)

-  The actual policy has a bigger level of micro-management, by setting one 
year and not allowing the NCC to change that. (Responding to Nick Hilliard)

- The problem of a form is that is not standard. This is economically 
non-sustainable and means that the cost of the abuse cases is on the back of 
the one actually reporting. (Responding to No No)

- The actual validation is not working, it is just a technical validation 
(responding to Gert Doering)

- The community prefers to do things in steps, we initially asked for an abuse 
mailbox, we then added a technical validation, now we are asking for a better 
validation. I am not asking to verify if you handle abuse case or not and I am 
not asking to take any new actions.



Angel Gonzalez Berdasco suuported the proposal, but also made multiple comments 
on a different approach, including an abuse-uri and highlighted that 
standarising the communications was important.



A number 

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Report & Co-Chair's Decision on Proposal 2019-04

[Brian Nisbet]

Jordi,

I'm not entirely certain that we would 100% agree here, but this may be nuance. 
We didn't do a direct mapping, but we did make an indicative assumption that 
opinions wouldn't have changed, while also considering what would have happened 
if those same people had said exactly the same thing in the Review Phase.

Effectively either of these two things would have had the same result for the 
decision on consensus.

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ 
Sent: Tuesday 8 September 2020 09:20
To: Brian Nisbet ; anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 

Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Report & Co-Chair's Decision on Proposal 2019-04


CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


Hi Brian,



I understand that the people can change their mind, for example, after other 
comments or the IA, etc.



This is the same across different proposal versions, even editorial text 
changes. People can change their mind.



However not stating a “mind change”, should be taken as having changed their 
position. I understand that you agree on all that and your decision is based on 
that perspective?



(I want to make sure that language differences between English and Spanish are 
not an interpretation problem here)



Regards,

Jordi

@jordipalet







El 8/9/20 10:07, "Brian Nisbet" 
mailto:brian.nis...@heanet.ie>> escribió:



Jordi,



Under the PDP, given potential changes to the policy and inputs such as the 
Impact Analysis it is very difficult for the Co-Chairs to make assumptions 
about points of view as we move into the Review Phase, hence people will often 
restate their support or opposition to the policy, and indeed will often hark 
back to comments they have previously made.



Again, this is why we listed the comments from the Discussion Phase and the 
Co-Chairs feel, even if everyone had made those same comments, the Co-Chairs 
feel there was no clear consensus for change.



Brian

Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG



Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270



From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ 
Sent: Tuesday 8 September 2020 08:58
To: Brian Nisbet ; anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 

Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Report & Co-Chair's Decision on Proposal 2019-04



CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.



Hi Brian, all,



First of all, tks for this detailed report. I’m still processing it.



However, I’ve a open question for you, which I think it has been also clear 
from other emails, that it is not clear for the community.



People in favor (or against) the proposal has not (including myself), re-stated 
their position or repeated the same arguments. Is not that an indication that 
they keep their previous position?



Regards,

Jordi

@jordipalet







El 7/9/20 17:19, "anti-abuse-wg en nombre de Brian Nisbet" 
mailto:anti-abuse-wg-boun...@ripe.net> en 
nombre de brian.nis...@heanet.ie<mailto:brian.nis...@heanet.ie>> escribió:



Colleagues,



A few weeks ago we reached the end of the latest review phase for 2019-04. The 
Co-Chairs have worked closely with the NCC Policy Development Office since then 
to try to make a decision on this policy. This email contains a report on the 
Discussion Phase and Review Phase and then a final decision which, we believe, 
is supported by the activity during those phases.



As always, this is underpinned by the RIPE PDP - 
https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-710<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ripe.net%2Fpublications%2Fdocs%2Fripe-710&data=02%7C01%7C%7C77d9871518aa4e5471c308d853d002a0%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637351500180901252&sdata=OKxXjMF5T8sQ6HRXsqXQ5GsJlRofQZn3X3UP4yTeYWA%3D&reserved=0>



Discussion Phase:



There was some clear support for the policy during the Discussion Phase. This 
came from:



Serge Droz, who felt that it would help in a number of cases and that an 
inability to answer an e-mail every six month probably indicated underlying 
issues. He also felt it would allow the community to understand who was doing 
good work and who wasn't, and it will preve

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Policy Proposal Withdrawn (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")

[Brian Nisbet]

Morning,

If you have specific disagreements with the Co-Chairs, then please contact us 
at aa-wg-ch...@ripe.net with the your reasoning for 2019-04 has reached 
consensus.

The appeals procedure beyond that is detailed in RIPE 710 and I have copied & 
pasted the specific paragraph here:

"If a grievance cannot be resolved with the chair of the WG the matter can be 
brought to the attention of the Working Group Chairs Collective (WGCC). Anyone 
may submit an appeal. This must be submitted to the relevant WG mailing list(s) 
and to the Policy Announce Mailing List (policy-annou...@ripe.net). The appeal 
will also be published by the RIPE NCC at appropriate locations on the RIPE web 
site. Any appeal should include a detailed and specific description of the 
issues and clearly explain why the appeal was submitted. An appeal must be 
submitted no later than four weeks after the appealable action has occurred.

The WGCC will decide by consensus whether to uphold or reject appeals which 
have been submitted. The decision of the WGCC should be reached no later than 
four weeks of an appeal being made. Interested parties shall recuse themselves 
from any discussion or decision within the WGCC relating to the appeal.

If the dispute cannot be resolved by the decision of the WGCC, the issue should 
be brought to the RIPE Chair. The decision of the RIPE Chair will be final."

The WGCC can be contacted at wg-cha...@ripe.net

However the first step is to contact the WG Chairs for AA-WG with an argument 
against our decision.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of JJS JJS 

Sent: Wednesday 9 September 2020 02:37
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Policy Proposal Withdrawn (Validation of 
"abuse-mailbox")


CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


I disagree that it did not reach consensus. There was never any proper measure 
of whether it reached consensus.

---



On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 1:48 AM Petrit Hasani 
mailto:phas...@ripe.net>> wrote:
Dear colleagues,

The policy proposal 2019-04, "Validation of "abuse-mailbox”” has been withdrawn.

The proposal aimed to have the RIPE NCC validate "abuse-c:” information more 
often and introduce a new validation process.

The proposal is archived and can be found at:
https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/archived-policy-proposals/archive-policy-proposals/<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ripe.net%2Fparticipate%2Fpolicies%2Farchived-policy-proposals%2Farchive-policy-proposals%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C05cc6e45873d4deb7f1e08d85461084c%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637352123016224328&sdata=lhwD6ZY4oQ0amrBhcsHYSKWZgBTkLpC3AwNzg6KhGE0%3D&reserved=0>

Reason for withdrawal:
The proposal did not reach consensus and the WG chairs did not feel that any 
further redrafting of the proposal would achieve consensus.

Kind regards,
--
Petrit Hasani
Policy Officer
RIPE NCC

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Policy Proposal Withdrawn (Validation of "abuse-mailbox")

[Brian Nisbet]

Jordi,

Thank you, yes, we're aware of that, and I know you know the PDP quite well, 
but I felt it was worth stating the relevant piece for others.

We will be back to you soon.

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ 
Sent: Wednesday 9 September 2020 10:21
To: Brian Nisbet ; anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 

Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Policy Proposal Withdrawn (Validation of 
"abuse-mailbox")


CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


Hi Brian,



I’ve already sent you (and the co-chairs and policy officer) my rational for 
disagreement yesterday.



I’m not sure if I need to copy to the list (I will read the PDP for refreshing 
myself on the appeals process later on today) or how much I should wait for 
your response before (if needed, hopefully not), starting an appeal.



Regards,

Jordi

@jordipalet







El 9/9/20 10:54, "anti-abuse-wg en nombre de Brian Nisbet" 
mailto:anti-abuse-wg-boun...@ripe.net> en 
nombre de brian.nis...@heanet.ie<mailto:brian.nis...@heanet.ie>> escribió:



Morning,



If you have specific disagreements with the Co-Chairs, then please contact us 
at aa-wg-ch...@ripe.net with the your reasoning for 2019-04 has reached 
consensus.



The appeals procedure beyond that is detailed in RIPE 710 and I have copied & 
pasted the specific paragraph here:



"If a grievance cannot be resolved with the chair of the WG the matter can be 
brought to the attention of the Working Group Chairs Collective (WGCC). Anyone 
may submit an appeal. This must be submitted to the relevant WG mailing list(s) 
and to the Policy Announce Mailing List (policy-annou...@ripe.net). The appeal 
will also be published by the RIPE NCC at appropriate locations on the RIPE web 
site. Any appeal should include a detailed and specific description of the 
issues and clearly explain why the appeal was submitted. An appeal must be 
submitted no later than four weeks after the appealable action has occurred.



The WGCC will decide by consensus whether to uphold or reject appeals which 
have been submitted. The decision of the WGCC should be reached no later than 
four weeks of an appeal being made. Interested parties shall recuse themselves 
from any discussion or decision within the WGCC relating to the appeal.



If the dispute cannot be resolved by the decision of the WGCC, the issue should 
be brought to the RIPE Chair. The decision of the RIPE Chair will be final."



The WGCC can be contacted at wg-cha...@ripe.net



However the first step is to contact the WG Chairs for AA-WG with an argument 
against our decision.



Thanks,



Brian

Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG



Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270



From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of JJS JJS 

Sent: Wednesday 9 September 2020 02:37
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-04 Policy Proposal Withdrawn (Validation of 
"abuse-mailbox")



CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.



I disagree that it did not reach consensus. There was never any proper measure 
of whether it reached consensus.



---







On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 1:48 AM Petrit Hasani 
mailto:phas...@ripe.net>> wrote:

Dear colleagues,

The policy proposal 2019-04, "Validation of "abuse-mailbox”” has been withdrawn.

The proposal aimed to have the RIPE NCC validate "abuse-c:” information more 
often and introduce a new validation process.

The proposal is archived and can be found at:
https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/archived-policy-proposals/archive-policy-proposals/<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ripe.net%2Fparticipate%2Fpolicies%2Farchived-policy-proposals%2Farchive-policy-proposals%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C67078553974541cd0eb208d854a1c354%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637352401030066177&sdata=Xcs6Z7sSfR7vagH1CcdO8Cwcki41xW5%2FOTY5%2BYwRep4%3D&reserved=0>

Reason for withdrawal:
The proposal did not reach consensus and the WG chairs did not feel that any 
further redrafting of the proposal would achieve consensus.

Kind regards,
--
Petrit H

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] [policy-announce] Appeal against the Anti-Abuse WG Co-chairs decisions on proposal 2019-04 (Validation of “abuse-mailbox”)

[Brian Nisbet]

All,

I'm on leave from work this week and not checking this email a/c as often as I 
normally would (or, hopefully, at all this week!), but I wanted to pop in to 
clarify something.

We do not vote on proposals in the RIPE community. We discuss them and either 
consensus is reached or it is not. There is, therefore, no calls for votes, nor 
counting of same.

I would encourage everyone to read the material at 
https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies in order to gain a better 
understanding of the process.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of PP 

Sent: Monday 5 October 2020 11:04
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] [policy-announce] Appeal against the Anti-Abuse WG 
Co-chairs decisions on proposal 2019-04 (Validation of “abuse-mailbox”)


CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


You don't know that it was "marginal" support, because no count was ever 
conducted.


The Chair never asked for a "vote", and then when people didn't "vote" (because 
they had never been asked to), they concluded (wrongly) that there was no 
support for the proposal.




On 5/10/2020 8:51 pm, Alex de Joode wrote:
Jordi,

The proposal received a lot of push back. Your statement "some clear support 
for the policy during the discussion phase", is missing the word "marginal" 
between some and clear.

I believe the Anti-Abuse WG Co-Chairs made the right call. Please consider 
retracting your appeal.


​--
IDGARA | Alex de Joode | a...@idgara.nl<mailto:a...@idgara.nl> | +31651108221

On Mon, 05-10-2020 10h 23min, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ 
<mailto:jordi.pa...@consulintel.es> wrote:
Hi all,

This appeal (attached in PDF) follows the process outlined by ripe-710 (RIPE 
PDP).


Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet





**
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theipv6company.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ca2a4a12e445d4c10fa4308d869160918%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637374890673962409&sdata=NQ%2FgJyz%2BpjWRO1Xh0PUGPmm7thiUh3jeEpAGLaYiRGw%3D&reserved=0>
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or 
confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the 
individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, 
copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if 
partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be 
considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware 
that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this 
information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly 
prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the 
original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.

[anti-abuse-wg] Final-ish Call for Agenda Items: AA-WG @ RIPE81

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

The AA-WG will be meeting at RIPE81 on Thursday 29th October at 10:00 CET.

We will be posting a draft agenda later this week, but we still have some time 
free, so if you would like to raise any items with the WG, please contact the 
Co-Chairs at aa-wg-ch...@ripe.net

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

[anti-abuse-wg] Draft Agenda - Anti-Abuse WG @ RIPE 81

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

Here is the draft agenda for our session next week. It will take place via the 
RIPE 81 meeting platform at 10:00 CET/UTC +1 on Thursday 29th October.

As mentioned, there is likely some time still available if anyone has anything 
they'd like to bring to the WG.

Please note C.2. where the Co-Chairs would like to facilitate some open 
discussion on where the WG feels we might go in regards to abuse validation and 
other similar topics.

A. Administrative Matters

* Welcome
* Scribe, Chat, Stenography
* Chat Etiquette
* Ratings Where Appropriate
* Approve Minutes from RIPE 80
* Finalise agenda

B. Update

* B1. Recent List Discussion

C. Policies -

 *C.1. Status of Policy Proposal 2019-04 - Validation of "abuse-mailbox"
 *C.2. Open discussion on abuse validation & next steps

D. Interactions -

E. Presentation -

X. A.O.B.

Z. Agenda for RIPE 82

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] IPv4 squatting -- Courtesy of AS44050, AS58552

[Brian Nisbet]

Ronald,

I'm glad you aren't offended/upset, but I agree with Randy's interpretation, 
especially as the initial email added no light/signal to the conversation at 
all.

Despite what may be believed the Co-Chairs don't like putting people in 
moderation, but we will if we have to.

However I suspect that X-posting to a list like apnic-talk may not be the 
wisest idea, given the different populations etc, and I suspect that's what led 
to the other exclamation of surprise. I'm not saying information should be 
hidden, but perhaps two separate emails might be, sadly, needed?

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Ronald F. 
Guilmette 
Sent: Tuesday 1 December 2020 05:12
To: apnic-t...@lists.apnic.net ; 
anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] IPv4 squatting -- Courtesy of AS44050, AS58552

CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


In message , Randy Bush  wrote:

>> Amongst the greatest mysteries of the shady underbelly of the
>> internet: how to pronounce "Guilmette"
>
>speaking of anti-abuse; back in the '80s we agreed that making fun of
>others' typos, misspellings, personal names, etc. was impolite.

I do not believe the original poster was making fun of my name, and
I likely would not take exception even if the OP had done so.

There have certainly been far more scurrilous and disturbing things
said about me personally, on various mailing lists, so I am somewhat
inoculated against taking too much offense nowadays about virtually
anything personal.

If one is fortunate to live long enough, one develops a thick skin.


Regards,
rfg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] IPv4 squatting -- Courtesy of AS44050, AS58552

[Brian Nisbet]

Folks,

I should be clear here, the Co-Chairs have no objection to the first post, 
nothing at all.

Personally I'm happy for misbehaviour to be called out, while obviously 
ensuring that people aren't unfairly tarred with bad brushes.

My comments about the apnic-talk address was that I wasn't sure if that list 
was used to the kind of content, and I was worried that it might not get 
Ronald's message where it would it best for it to go. However I'm not sure 
(without looking it up) what the best reporting mechanisms for APNIC members 
are. My comments there were advisory, nothing more.

I too would love a discussion where we didn't feel like we had to say a word 
about the civility of posting, trust me! And thankfully we have had quite a few 
of those!

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Serge Droz 
via anti-abuse-wg 
Sent: Wednesday 2 December 2020 08:12
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] IPv4 squatting -- Courtesy of AS44050, AS58552

CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


First of: Congrats and thank you Ronald for this work.

What makes me a bit sad is, that posting this here immediately starts a
discussion about what is expected behavior on these lists, rather than
how we could combat abuse more efficiently.

It seems a seeminglu, to me at least, humorous remark, sparks more
discussion than the troubling fact that criminals have the time of their
lives during this period of time.

I'm all in favor of staying civil on public fora. But noting in the
original post was not civil. I am wondering what the we want to achieve
here on the anti-abuse list? Call me stupid, but I just don't get it.

Best
Serge


On 01.12.20 22:48, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
> In message 
>  outlook.com>, Brian Nisbet  wrote:
>
>> However I suspect that X-posting to a list like apnic-talk may not be the
>> wisest idea, given the different populations etc...
>
> It is among my fondest hopes that cybercriminals of all stripes, and
> particularly the ones who squat on IPv4 space that doesn't belong to
> them, will, in future, show more respect for regional boundaries, such
> that their devious activities will only oblige me to notify the
> members of a single one of the five RIR regions regarding any single
> one of these elaborate criminal schemes.  Alas, in this instance
> however, the perpetrators, in a very unsportsmanlike manner, elected
> to make messes whose roots were found in both the RIPE region and also
> in the APNIC region.  (And that's not even to mention that most of the
> squatted IPv4 real estate was and is under the administration of the
> ARIN region.)
>
> Clearly, authorities in all five regions should be devoting somewhat
> more effort towards the cultivation of a better and more respectful
> class of cybercriminals who will confine their convoluted schemes to
> their own home regions.
>
>
> Regards,
> rfg
>

--
Dr. Serge Droz
Chair of the FIRST Board of Directors
https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.first.org%2F&data=04%7C01%7C%7C2f6a30d3cd21408fe43108d8969a16ec%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637424935833941387%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=ZYQoXWNHJk8wQBBHAZcv6NcDKsDe7cp%2F2dy8SHzsSV8%3D&reserved=0

[anti-abuse-wg] Mailing List Membership Update

[Brian Nisbet]

Folks,

In the spirit of full disclosure in regards to actions by the Co-Chairs I 
wanted to let everyone know that Elad Cohen has been banned from the mailing 
list.

After a period of time in moderation he repeatedly showed that he was unwilling 
to abide by the Community/Working Group Code of Conduct and that his only 
contributions were to spread fud and conspiracy theories, as well as insulting 
other members. This is not useful.

We informed him yesterday.

The Co-Chairs really do not like doing this, but we found ourselves with no 
other option in this instance.

If you have any questions, then please contact us on aa-wg-ch...@ripe.net

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] 196.52.0.0/14 revoked, cleanup efforts needed

[Brian Nisbet]

Ostap,

Just to clarify, this list is moderated where necessary, in line with 
https://www.ripe.net/participate/mail/ripe-mailing-list-ripe-forum-code-of-conduct
 and certainly we would generally ask users to be very careful in what they 
post about named individuals.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Ostap Efremov 

Sent: Wednesday 20 January 2021 01:00
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: [anti-abuse-wg] 196.52.0.0/14 revoked, cleanup efforts needed


CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


Hi,

196.52.0.0/14<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2F196.52.0.0%2F14&data=04%7C01%7C%7Ca713fe080f3a458f024e08d8bcdef0fb%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637467013018583234%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=qBwRVD0Gt7l%2BJfy4xQeRi6tYstxHUUB4r7TpjOKCHbU%3D&reserved=0>
 was recently revoked.
Before it was revoked, the whois for this /14 was:
inetnum:196.52.0.0 - 196.55.255.255
netname:LogicWeb-Inc
descr:  LogicWeb Inc.
descr:  3003 Woodbridge Ave
descr:  Edison, NJ 08837
country:ZA
remarks:REMARK
remarks:The custodianship of this IP prefix is presently
remarks:in dispute. A police investigation is on-going
remarks:and AFRINIC reserves the right to
remarks:reclaim this IP prefix at anytime.
remarks:REMARK===
However, now, this /14 has been revoked by AFRINIC. Do a whois on it and you 
will see, it's unallocated.
I believe this /14 was under control from our big friend from Israel, but I 
don't remember.
This does not matter however.
But, sadly there are about 367 ip ranges being announced from this /14
https://pastebin.com/raw/MHaW3nPe<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpastebin.com%2Fraw%2FMHaW3nPe&data=04%7C01%7C%7Ca713fe080f3a458f024e08d8bcdef0fb%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637467013018593189%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=mNhl8YTKsHyPA1ftdlEDqB%2BN%2FDZ0kgQsW7N11O9M1So%3D&reserved=0>
>From about 71 unique ASN's
This is a BOGON, unallocated space.
I would appreciate if any network that is on that list and on this mailing 
list, would stop announcing parts of this hijacked /14.
I reached out to  RADB to remove all the radb entries concerning this /14, 
however after 72 hours they still haven't.
This is not an ignored ticket, we have escalated internally with our RADb 
admins and they are looking into it. I will let them know that you are looking 
for a update and we will provide it as soon as possible.
How is it possible that they can't just delete all entries? It is UNALLOCATED 
SPACE, it shouldn't be routed, it shouldn't have radb.
https://www.radb.net/query?advanced_query=1&keywords=-M+196.52.0.0%2F14&-T+option=&ip_option=&-i+option=&db=RADB<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.radb.net%2Fquery%3Fadvanced_query%3D1%26keywords%3D-M%2B196.52.0.0%252F14%26-T%2Boption%3D%26ip_option%3D%26-i%2Boption%3D%26db%3DRADB&data=04%7C01%7C%7Ca713fe080f3a458f024e08d8bcdef0fb%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637467013018593189%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=pHHbx6EsZY12V6VoW7Mkvb1kWvBL2f7HF4Q97k7J6qc%3D&reserved=0>
I have also tried to post about this massive source of BOGONS on the nanog 
mailing list, however, they rejected my posts.
Most likely because it possibly concerns "that one guy from Israel", however 
the nanog moderators refused to comment while continuing to reject my posts.
Their self-censorship is very destructive and harmful. I hope that if this list 
is moderated, I will not have any trouble posting about this issue.

Greetings,
Ostap.

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] REPORT: DDoS-Guard - AS57724, AS262254, AS49612

[Brian Nisbet]

Claire,

Welcome to the RIPE AA-WG working group!

The DisInfo group looks interesting and there's definitely good work to do 
there! I should note, however, that the AA-WG is not really intended to look at 
the content on websites or applications, rather the abuse of network resources 
as per the charter:

https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/wg/active-wg/anti-abuse

Now, this is constantly evolving and there are areas of overlap, and often 
companies that are willing to host extremely disagreeable content (for certain 
values of same) are willing to host those who would abuse other networks or 
have not perhaps the most open or transparent relationship with those who have 
given them the resources needed to do business.

I would be very happy to discuss this further with you or your colleagues (as I 
would be with any member of the WG).

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Claire 
Pershan 
Sent: Thursday 4 February 2021 08:49
To: Ronald F. Guilmette 
Cc: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] REPORT: DDoS-Guard - AS57724, AS262254, AS49612


CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


Hi Ronald, all,

I might jump on this as an opportunity to introduce myself, having just joined 
this mailing list. I work on policy and community relations at EU DisinfoLab, a 
small research-focused NGO that mainly tracks coordinated disinformation 
campaigns targeting the EU and member states. Parler's move to DDOoS-Guard is 
clearly on our radar as this is not the first or last of this kind of 
'migration' we'll see. Many civil society organisations like mine lack 
technical literacy in this area and end up contradicting ourselves in our 
positions, so I'm here with an open ear. My background is in human rights and I 
was an ISOC youth ambassador last year.

looking forward to exchanging with you all here,
Claire

On Thu, 4 Feb 2021 at 02:32, Ronald F. Guilmette 
mailto:r...@tristatelogic.com>> wrote:
I hope that you all will read this report:

English version:
https://meduza.io/en/feature/2021/01/29/remove-this-infection-from-your-network<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmeduza.io%2Fen%2Ffeature%2F2021%2F01%2F29%2Fremove-this-infection-from-your-network&data=04%7C01%7C%7C8c2d4a217c994dd9f33308d8c8e9d1b3%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637480254323069372%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=kKU5cAysehXh2aUEGPlPxn4cSkEmzVWuiqXz7jaRKWU%3D&reserved=0>

Russian version:
https://meduza.io/feature/2021/01/28/uberite-etu-zarazu-iz-svoey-seti<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmeduza.io%2Ffeature%2F2021%2F01%2F28%2Fuberite-etu-zarazu-iz-svoey-seti&data=04%7C01%7C%7C8c2d4a217c994dd9f33308d8c8e9d1b3%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637480254323079337%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=KRda4b2nSwZbK%2BJGpoCCWbyiZ9N8Y79v%2BMsFMeq8zSc%3D&reserved=0>


Regards,
rfg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] UCEPROTECT DNSBL possibly abusive practice and RIPEStat Blacklist entries widget

[Brian Nisbet]

Christian,

Speaking purely personally, I would certainly be in favour of RIPEstat 
featuring more RBLs, yes.

Brian


Brian Nisbet

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Christian 
Teuschel 
Sent: Thursday 4 March 2021 16:16
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] UCEPROTECT DNSBL possibly abusive practice and 
RIPEStat Blacklist entries widget

CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


Hi Elvis and Suresh, dear colleagues,

Putting exact numbers on how many operators are using UCEProtect is
difficult, but through feedback from users, network operators and
members we understand that it is in use and that the provisioning of
this RBL on RIPEstat has value.

If I am reading the feedback in this discussion correctly, the sentiment
is leaning towards adding more RBLs instead of less and if that is the
case we are going to look into how and when we can achieve this. Please
let me know if that is aligned with your requirements/expectations.

Best regards,
Christian

On 04/03/2021 09:54, Elvis Daniel Velea wrote:
> Hi Christian,
>
> while it may be useful to have their data source, it only shows the RIPE
> NCC favors one or two operators and I think that is damaging to the
> whole idea of being impartial.
>
> You either include a good list of blacklist operators and their data or
> none. Including only a couple will lead to the impression that only
> those are important enough to be considered by the RIPE NCC.
>
> my 2 cents,
> Elvis
>
> On 3/3/21 8:27 AM, Christian Teuschel wrote:
>> Dear colleagues,
>>
>> RIPEstat is a neutral source of information and we aim to provide users
>> with access to as many data sources as possible to provide insights.
>>
>> UCEProtect was added as a data source prior to 2010 and is still used by
>> several network operators to filter traffic into their networks.
>> Including it as a data source in RIPEstat allows users to see whether
>> resources are included in their lists.
>>
>> RIPE NCC does not pay for, support or endorse their practices, although
>> we understand that continuing to include UCEProtect as a data source
>> could be misunderstood as such. We also do not use their lists to filter
>> traffic on our services.
>>
>> Our goal remains to provide the best visibility and tools for network
>> operators to diagnose their networks. We have also heard your feedback
>> regarding including more RBLs. It is something that we have considered
>> in the past, and we are open to revisiting this.
>>
>> RIPEstat is driven by the community. We would like to hear from you
>> about whether including UCEProtect as a data source is useful.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Christian
>>
>> On 02/03/2021 00:08, Kristijonas Lukas Bukauskas via anti-abuse-wg wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I noticed that RIPE NCC uses uceprotect-level1, uceprotect-level2 and
>>> uceprotect-level3 in RIPEStat Anti Abuse Blacklist Entries widget.
>>>
>>> There have been controversial positions about this blacklist recently:
>>>
>>> 1)
>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsuccess.trendmicro.com%2Fsolution%2F000236583-Emails-being-rejected-by-RBL-UCEPROTECL-in-Hosted-Email-Security-and-Email-Security&data=04%7C01%7C%7Cd6eabb75245d44d761c208d8df28ed57%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637504714184253161%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=yFgzAJGezG7oQtmEAhB0s8Mp9Cq5EgGAJYxlh88v2Ic%3D&reserved=0
>>>
>>> <https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsuccess.trendmicro.com%2Fsolution%2F000236583-Emails-being-rejected-by-RBL-UCEPROTECL-in-Hosted-Email-Security-and-Email-Security&data=04%7C01%7C%7Cd6eabb75245d44d761c208d8df28ed57%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637504714184253161%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=yFgzAJGezG7oQtmEAhB0s8Mp9Cq5EgGAJYxlh88v2Ic%3D&reserved=0>
>>>
>>> 2) 
>>> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.sucuri.net%2F2021%2F02%2Fuceprotect-when-rbls-go-bad.html&data=04%7C01%7C%7Cd6eabb75245d44d761c208d8df28ed57%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7

[anti-abuse-wg] Call For Agenda Items - RIPE82

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

RIPE 82 will be taking place somewhere on the Internet from the 17th - 21st May 
2021.

https://ripe82.ripe.net<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fripe81.ripe.net%2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7C3cb4d414ce8c48a380c608d8296de8d9%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637304899326225831&sdata=WDjqNjaaX4fs%2BUbB8mo4IpZmD1y%2BXzFuc1VjJfuRzxM%3D&reserved=0>

The Anti-Abuse WG will be meeting and Alireza, Tobias and I would invite people 
to submit topics for discussion,  presentations for general enlightenment and, 
of course, work items for the working group.

The session is currently scheduled for Wednesday 19th, but the date and time 
may both change as the various agendas fill up, we'll keep you posted.

As always you can reach us at aa-wg-ch...@ripe.net

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet (he/him)

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Call For Agenda Items - RIPE82

[Brian Nisbet]

Hans-Martin,

Ah, interesting, that is, as Jordi says, an issue with my mail client and me 
being lazy while copying & pasting, but you make an excellent point.

I shall be more careful in future. 🙂

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet (he/him)

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Hans-Martin 
Mosner 
Sent: Monday 29 March 2021 12:14
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Call For Agenda Items - RIPE82


CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


Am 23.03.21 um 17:53 schrieb Brian Nisbet:
Colleagues,

RIPE 82 will be taking place somewhere on the Internet from the 17th - 21st May 
2021.

https://ripe82.ripe.net<https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fripe81.ripe.net%2F&data=04%7C01%7C%7C62766fc627d449503d5908d8f2a4b573%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637526136990432328%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=2P1C2tYvuieaUR7Ze7CE74Y9iRVtIKdQaob29nt68Zw%3D&reserved=0>


Don't know if anyone noticed, but this is a nice example of how tricksters get 
you to link on misleading URLs :-)

After an indirection via a Microsoft "safelinks" service, the URL does not lead 
to ripe82.ripe.net, as the readable text would imply, but to ripe81.ripe.net :-)


Cheers,
Hans-Martin

[anti-abuse-wg] DRAFT Agenda: RIPE82 Anti-Abuse WG Meeting

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

Here is the current draft agenda for the meeting. I do expect there to be a 
couple of changes between now and the session in May, but early drafts are good?

I should also point out that there is still time in the meeting slot if anyone 
else would like to submit any content/work items/discussions etc.

A. Administrative Matters

* Welcome
* Scribe, Chat, Stenography
* Chat Etiquette
* Ratings Where Appropriate
* Approve Minutes from RIPE 80
* Finalise agenda
* Working Group Chair Selection

B. Update

* B1. Recent List Discussion

C. Policies -

 *C.1. Continued? open discussion on abuse validation & next steps

D. Interactions -

E. Presentation -

 *E.1. 'DDoS Never Dies? - An IXP Perspective on DDoS Amplification 
Attacks' - Daniel Kopp, DE-CIX

X. A.O.B.

Z. Agenda for RIPE 83


Brian Nisbet (he/him)

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] DRAFT Agenda: RIPE82 Anti-Abuse WG Meeting

[Brian Nisbet]

We will, of course, be approving the minutes from RIPE 81, not RIPE 80, we've 
already done those!

Thank you to Piotr for pointing that out. 🙂

Brian


Brian Nisbet (he/him)

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Brian Nisbet 

Sent: Wednesday 21 April 2021 10:54
To: anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 
Cc: Martina De Mas 
Subject: [anti-abuse-wg] DRAFT Agenda: RIPE82 Anti-Abuse WG Meeting


CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


Colleagues,

Here is the current draft agenda for the meeting. I do expect there to be a 
couple of changes between now and the session in May, but early drafts are good?

I should also point out that there is still time in the meeting slot if anyone 
else would like to submit any content/work items/discussions etc.

A. Administrative Matters

* Welcome
* Scribe, Chat, Stenography
* Chat Etiquette
* Ratings Where Appropriate
* Approve Minutes from RIPE 80
* Finalise agenda
* Working Group Chair Selection

B. Update

* B1. Recent List Discussion

C. Policies -

 *C.1. Continued? open discussion on abuse validation & next steps

D. Interactions -

E. Presentation -

 *E.1. 'DDoS Never Dies? - An IXP Perspective on DDoS Amplification 
Attacks' - Daniel Kopp, DE-CIX

X. A.O.B.

Z. Agenda for RIPE 83


Brian Nisbet (he/him)

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] AS8003 and U.S. Department of Defense routing

[Brian Nisbet]

Ronald,

Interesting, thanks. I've also been reading Geoff Heuston on this, albeit with 
a different focus to the AP article. https://labs.apnic.net/?p=1431

Brian


Brian Nisbet (he/him)

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: anti-abuse-wg  on behalf of Ronald F. 
Guilmette 
Sent: Sunday 25 April 2021 10:26
To: routing...@ripe.net ; anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net 

Subject: [anti-abuse-wg] AS8003 and U.S. Department of Defense routing

CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


Greetings friends,

I though that you all might like to be aware of this:

https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fapnews.com%2Farticle%2Ftechnology-business-government-and-politics-b26ab809d1e9fdb53314f56299399949&data=04%7C01%7C%7Cfd7d652f23b94aaf9ae008d907cc59c6%7Ccd9e8269dfb648e082538b7baf8d3391%7C0%7C0%7C637549396940074739%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=x396TEEAHueMqZG3in%2FeHuHQRaipx%2FzEJWmAbYEiW3c%3D&reserved=0


Regards,
rfg

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] AS8003 and U.S. Department of Defense routing

[Brian Nisbet]

Randy,

Ah, I don't know how that happened, but Ronald X-posted to Routing and I 
managed not to. Don't worry, we're not trying to steal their family jewels. 🙂

Brian


Brian Nisbet (he/him)

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270


From: Randy Bush 
Sent: Tuesday 27 April 2021 16:22
To: Brian Nisbet 
Cc: Anti Abuse WG 
Subject: Re: [anti-abuse-wg] AS8003 and U.S. Department of Defense routing

CAUTION[External]: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do 
not click on links or open the attachments unless you recognise the sender and 
know the content is safe.


interesting wg to do routing security analysis.

as i do really not know the dod's or their proxy's motive(s), i can not
say much about their tactics let alone strategy.

i do know, and have actually seen and experienced, part of 11/8 being
used as if it was 1918 space; ripe bologna was the first time.  and the
food in that town was fantastic!

a /8 telescope would pick up leakage patterns as well as the current
shotgun blast of announcements (i presume folk have looked at the actual
announcements).  i would naïvely think that the /8 might be slightly
more easily analyzed than the pieces.

maybe, as the telescope analysis shows focused leaks, they are trying to
disrupt those focused uses with these focused announcements.

but, if an op is using 11.12.666.0/23 internally, would they be careless
enough to accept an exogenous announcement of that space?  i guess i
should not underestimate carelessness.

is some random (small, i hope) isp using my address space internally as
1918 equivalent abusive, beyond their customers maybe not be able to
reach my network?  if so, maybe the vigilantes are looking in the wrong
direction.

randy

---
ra...@psg.com
`gpg --locate-external-keys --auto-key-locate wkd ra...@psg.com`
signatures are back, thanks to dmarc header butchery

[anti-abuse-wg] Revised DRAFT Agenda - AA-WG Session RIPE 82

[Brian Nisbet]

Colleagues,

Here is an updated draft agenda for our session on Wednesday 19th May at 10:30 
CEST.

A. Administrative Matters

* Welcome
* Scribe, Chat, Stenography
* Chat Etiquette
* Ratings Where Appropriate
* Approve Minutes from RIPE 81
* Finalise agenda
* Working Group Chair Selection

B. Update

* B1. Recent List Discussion

C. Policies -

 *C.1. Continued? open discussion on abuse validation & next steps

D. Interactions -

 *D.1. The DNS Abuse Institute, Graeme Bunton

E. Presentation -

 *E.1. 'DDoS Never Dies? - An IXP Perspective on DDoS Amplification 
Attacks' - Daniel Kopp, DE-CIX

X. A.O.B.

Z. Agenda for RIPE 83

As always, please contact aa-wg-ch...@ripe.net if you have any questions, 
suggestions, submissions or updates.

Thanks,

Brian
Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG


Brian Nisbet (he/him)

Service Operations Manager

HEAnet CLG, Ireland's National Education and Research Network

1st Floor, 5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin D01 X8N7, Ireland

+35316609040 brian.nis...@heanet.ie www.heanet.ie

Registered in Ireland, No. 275301. CRA No. 20036270