[anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 and over-reach
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 and over-reach
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 and over-reach
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Hank Nussbacher
hank at efes.iucc.ac.il
Sat Mar 23 18:23:20 CET 2019
On 23/03/2019 13:31, Nick Hilliard wrote: > JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via anti-abuse-wg wrote on 22/03/2019 22:55: >> The legal bindings of the NCC already have that for those that don’t >> follow existing policies, don’t pay bills, etc. So, the proposal is >> adding in the table a policy for confirming what is a hijack >> according to the community consensus. Same way we did for how we >> distribute resources, do transfers, etc. > > Hi Jordi, > > couple of things: > > 1. it's not the job of the RIPE NCC to make up for a short-fall of > civil legislation in this area, no matter how distasteful we might > find the consequences of this; Purity of concept will result in massive gov't intervention since we will have shown that we don't know how to self-regulate. The voices are already there: https://hackernoon.com/why-the-internet-must-be-regulated-9d65031e7491 If you have an alternative solution, not even a better one, please suggest it. Regards, Hank
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 and over-reach
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2019-03 and over-reach
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]