nanog mailing list archives
RE: Abuse procedures... Reality Checks
From: <michael.dillon () bt com>
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2007 21:39:26 +0100
I would have to respectfully disagree with you. When network operators do due diligence and SWIP their sub-allocations, they (the sub-allocations) should be authoritative in regards to things like RBLs.
How do you tell when they have actually done "due diligence". Existence of a SWIP record is essentially meaningless in this day and age. Many people do them automatically and there may well be nobody left on staff who knows that this is happening or what it all means. --Michael Dillon
Current thread:
- Re: Abuse procedures... Reality Checks Fergie (Apr 07)
- Re: Abuse procedures... Reality Checks william(at)elan.net (Apr 07)
- RE: Abuse procedures... Reality Checks Frank Bulk (Apr 07)
- RE: Abuse procedures... Reality Checks william(at)elan.net (Apr 07)
- RE: Abuse procedures... Reality Checks Frank Bulk (Apr 07)
- RE: Abuse procedures... Reality Checks michael.dillon (Apr 09)
- RE: Abuse procedures... Reality Checks Chris L. Morrow (Apr 09)
- RE: Abuse procedures... Reality Checks Frank Bulk (Apr 07)
- Re: Abuse procedures... Reality Checks Rich Kulawiec (Apr 13)
- Re: Abuse procedures... Reality Checks Steve Sobol (Apr 13)
- Re: Abuse procedures... Reality Checks william(at)elan.net (Apr 07)
- RE: Abuse procedures... Reality Checks Frank Bulk (Apr 10)
- Re: Abuse procedures... Reality Checks Rich Kulawiec (Apr 11)
- Message not available
- RE: Abuse procedures... Reality Checks Frank Bulk (Apr 11)
- RE: Abuse procedures... Reality Checks Mikael Abrahamsson (Apr 11)
- Re: Abuse procedures... Reality Checks Leigh Porter (Apr 12)
- Message not available
- RE: Limiting email abuse by subscribers [was: Abuse procedures... Reality Checks] Frank Bulk (Apr 12)