Re: [apops] Fwd: [ppml] Policy Proposal 2003-2: Network Abuse]
- To: apops at apops dot net
- Subject: Re: [apops] Fwd: [ppml] Policy Proposal 2003-2: Network Abuse]
- From: Suresh Ramasubramanian <suresh at outblaze dot com>
- Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2003 17:53:39 +0530
- In-reply-to: <200303051201.h25C1rs04355 at boreas dot isi dot edu>
- List-archive: <http://www.apnic.net/mailing-lists/apops/>
- List-help: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=help>
- List-id: Asia Pacific Operations Forum <apops.apops.net>
- List-post: <mailto:email@example.com>
- List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apops>,<mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=subscribe>
- List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apops>,<mailto:email@example.com?subject=unsubscribe>
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Sender: email@example.com
They are -required- per IETF standards. and they exist in most places but are generally ignored.
Well, I have a bit less than 5 years of experience is all. Doing nothing other than common or garden abuse desk work at that, but I beg to differ. I have seen several cases where mail to postmaster etc gets ignored, but mail to other role accounts (support, say - or hostmaster) gets answered.% However, the more role accounts exist, the better the chance that at least % someone around will read and respond to a complaint on net abuse / spam. not in my 25 years of experience.
To contact people responsible for a network. And what happens when said data is bogus? Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?% I know about legacy delegations ... and the fact that ISPs are the ones who % route. But the point this guy wants to make (I think) - and I agree with % it - is that an alternative can (or rather should) be worked out to tackle % the huge problem that bogus whois data is becoming, even with the current % procedures in place. why is there whois data in the first place?
Spammers are being tracked pretty freely without much interference from governments, right now. Informal, buddy-buddy contacts between ISP abuse desk people, for example. Or things as simple as searching usenet archives and listings in some of the more sensible blocklists around.% RICO is the *first* thing that gets suggested when this sort of thing comes % up. However, those who do propound this idea (in a far more sensible / ah... just what the net needs, more government regulation. which government?
Yes, a centralized and regulated "spammer bureau" of sorts is a rather far fetched idea, I agree.
But the two good things from this entire harebrained proposal still remain -
_what_ should be done to counter the huge - and growing - problem of stale and/or bogus whois data?
Can a BCP advocating responsible handling of net abuse be circulated by the RIRs to their customers? Something on the lines of http://www.linx.net/noncore/bcp/ube-bcp.html which later developed into http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-206.html