nanog mailing list archives
Re: proper list for net abuse discussions?
From: Sean Donelan <SEAN () SDG DRA COM>
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 18:59:19 -0600
randy () psg COM (Randy Bush) writes:
outage-discuss () academ com and Seans excellent idig missive... both excellent tools.i do not think either of these is for abuse discussions. abuse != outage except when the abuser is a backhoe.
I specifically tried to exclude "abuse" and "security" incidents for a variety of reasons. Not the least of which, is because I'm neither a cop nor a lawyer, just an engineer. For those that don't keep up on these things, the Department of Commerce has named three sector coordinators to address attacks on critical information and communication infrastructures. The designated representatives are - Information Technology Association of America - Telecommunications Industry Association - United States Telephone Association. In so far as "abuse" may be considered an attack, I would suggest contacting one of the designated sector coordinators. -- Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO Affiliation given for identification not representation
Current thread:
- proper list for net abuse discussions? Dan Hollis (Apr 02)
- Re: proper list for net abuse discussions? Ravi Pina (Apr 02)
- Re: proper list for net abuse discussions? TTSG (Apr 02)
- Re: proper list for net abuse discussions? bmanning (Apr 02)
- Re: proper list for net abuse discussions? Randy Bush (Apr 03)
- Re: proper list for net abuse discussions? Dan Hollis (Apr 02)
- Re: proper list for net abuse discussions? TTSG (Apr 02)
- Re: proper list for net abuse discussions? Rich Sena (Apr 03)
- Re: proper list for net abuse discussions? bmanning (Apr 02)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: proper list for net abuse discussions? Dan Hollis (Apr 02)
- Re: proper list for net abuse discussions? Owen DeLong (Apr 03)
- Re: proper list for net abuse discussions? Sean Donelan (Apr 03)