Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Draft Agenda - AA-WG RIPE73

On Tue, 04 Oct 2016 21:42:59 +0530 Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > On 04/10/16, 9:25 PM, "anti-abuse-wg on behalf of ox" > wrote: > > Doing what you are doing. And pointing out that the AUP's you are > > referring

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Draft Agenda - AA-WG RIPE73

On 04/10/16, 9:25 PM, "anti-abuse-wg on behalf of ox" wrote: > Doing what you are doing. And pointing out that the AUP's you are referring > to are written by, at the least, non ethical people and at the most, dishonest > people. Ah,

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Draft Agenda - AA-WG RIPE73

On Tue, 04 Oct 2016 21:19:07 +0530 Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > I asked about AUP clauses > We were not talking about AUP clauses. You were using that in an attempt to highlight your point. > You’re asking me back questions about SMTP and bounce handling > Doing what

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Draft Agenda - AA-WG RIPE73

I asked about AUP clauses You’re asking me back questions about SMTP and bounce handling That is not an answer to my question, and nor does it follow the socratic method of trying to answer a question by asking more questions, because your line of reasoning is entirely irrelevant to the matter

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Draft Agenda - AA-WG RIPE73

On Tue, 04 Oct 2016 21:03:04 +0530 Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Do yourself a favour. Go review the acceptable use policies of > various large ISPs and email providers. Then come back with a better > informed reply. > It is pointless to continue this discussion, without

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Draft Agenda - AA-WG RIPE73

Do yourself a favour. Go review the acceptable use policies of various large ISPs and email providers. Then come back with a better informed reply. It is pointless to continue this discussion, without your being better informed. --srs On 04/10/16, 8:56 PM, "ox" wrote:

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Draft Agenda - AA-WG RIPE73

Just to point out, from your tediously long but eloquent reply, for clarity: You claim that trying to define Internet Abuse is asinine behavior. To that I respond: I do not agree with you. I do not think that trying to define Internet Abuse is behaving like an Ass. I do think that not

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Draft Agenda - AA-WG RIPE73

On Tue, 04 Oct 2016 19:14:32 +0530 Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Can we please stick to debating facts instead of fautuous analogies > based on transmogrifying animals? > What I am seeing here is a weird set of justifications of inaction > based on improbable corner cases.

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Draft Agenda - AA-WG RIPE73

Can we please stick to debating facts instead of fautuous analogies based on transmogrifying animals? What I am seeing here is a weird set of justifications of inaction based on improbable corner cases. Actual cases related to abuse enforcement (anonymized would be fine) are going to be far

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Draft Agenda - AA-WG RIPE73

Andre, that your cow is a donkey is purely your problem, not of the others subscribed to the mailing list. On 10/04/16 15:49, ox wrote: my cow is a donkey -- Kind regards, CTO at *Foton Telecom CJSC* Tel.: +7 (499) 679-99-99 AS42861 on PeeringDB , Qrator

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] Draft Agenda - AA-WG RIPE73

Hello Everyone, On Tue, 4 Oct 2016 09:02:24 +0100 Brian Nisbet wrote: > Colleagues, > Here is the draft agenda for RIPE 73. The AA-WG meeting will be taking > place on Thursday 27th October at 12:00 CEST. > > We're pretty full at this point, but there is some possible

[anti-abuse-wg] Draft Agenda - AA-WG RIPE73

Colleagues, Here is the draft agenda for RIPE 73. The AA-WG meeting will be taking place on Thursday 27th October at 12:00 CEST. We're pretty full at this point, but there is some possible room if something urgent crops up. It would also be good if some of those who are involved in the