Hi Marilson,
El 27/3/19 19:38, "Marilson Mapa" escribió:
Hola Jordi
> I think the validation should be more exhaustive, this is one of the aspects
> of my proposal.
I agree, but then why do you care only about the resource-holders? What about
the victims of the end users? And
Running a ticketing system could involve significant resources. However
simply accepting, aggregating, and providing public information on contacts
that are non-functional, ideally via an API so we can use it for ... :D
On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 7:38 AM Michael Peddemors
wrote:
> Still would like
Still would like to see that idea I put forth about ARIN actually having
a public ticketing system, for when the public reports inaccurate data.
This way a public record can be seen to how long tickets remain
unresolved, and a bit of public shaming on this.
I think this would do more than most
Hola Jordi
> I think the validation should be more exhaustive, this is one of the
aspects of my proposal.
I agree, but then why do you care only about the resource-holders? What
about the victims of the end users? And the victims of the LIRs?
> The most important goal is to ensure that an abuse
Hi Marilson,
El 27/3/19 1:34, "ARIN-PPML en nombre de Marilson Mapa"
escribió:
If the current policy, “3.6. Annual Validation of ARIN’s Public Whois Point of
Contact Data” does not provide sufficient validation of the actual availability
of the abuse mailbox, a standard
If the current policy, “3.6. Annual Validation of ARIN’s Public Whois Point
of Contact Data” does not provide sufficient validation of the actual
availability of the abuse mailbox, a standard abuse-c/abuse-mailbox as a
pointer to the actual abuse POC, also won't solve the problem of the abuse
On 21 March 2019, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) accepted
"ARIN-prop-264: Validation of Abuse-mailbox" as a Draft Policy.
The Draft Policy text is below and can be found at:
https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_5/
You are encouraged to discuss all Draft Policies on PPML. The AC
