Re: [anti-abuse-wg] [db-wg] RIPE Policy Proposal 2017-02 Validates Database Attributes

2017-09-11 Thread Horváth Ágoston János
Hi all, Agreed that a yearly email ping-pong is not really a good verification of abuse contact address. It's trivial to let RIPE NCC mails through and throw away the rest. But, one might ask, what's the point of a database if the data is not reliable? What's the point of all that contact info

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] [db-wg] RIPE Policy Proposal 2017-02 Validates Database Attributes

2017-09-08 Thread Brian Nisbet
There are many points to address here, but from the point of view of the PDP I will address two. First off, this policy has been raised in the Anti-Abuse Working Group. This has been agreed between the relevant WG Chairs. While obviously people are free to discuss it wherever they want, only

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] [db-wg] RIPE Policy Proposal 2017-02 Validates Database Attributes

2017-09-08 Thread Gert Doering
Hi, On Thu, Sep 07, 2017 at 05:54:04PM +0100, Sascha Luck [ml] wrote: > I will discuss this here as I do not accept the Anti-Abuse WG as > a forum for this proposal. For one thing, this proposal affects > every ripedb user - in fact, as this entails changes to how the > NCC provides services, the

Re: [anti-abuse-wg] [db-wg] RIPE Policy Proposal 2017-02 Validates Database Attributes

2017-09-08 Thread Sascha Luck [ml]
All, I will discuss this here as I do not accept the Anti-Abuse WG as a forum for this proposal. For one thing, this proposal affects every ripedb user - in fact, as this entails changes to how the NCC provides services, the services-wg would be an even better venue. For another, given the