nanog mailing list archives
Re: Stupid Question: Network Abuse RFC?
From: "Christopher Morrow" <christopher.morrow () gmail com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 00:58:11 -0500
On Jan 13, 2008 12:43 AM, Paul Ferguson <fergdawg () netzero net> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - -- Randy Bush <randy () psg com> wrote:2142 but i am surprised you asked here instead of an ietf list. here weactually do the stuff, not tell other folk how they should do it. :)Thanks for the pointer, and I even appreciate you snarky reply. :-)
There was also some work ongoing in INCH, that included some machine-parsable reporting formats (RID I believe... Ms Moriarty's work, if I remember correctly)
Current thread:
- Stupid Question: Network Abuse RFC? Paul Ferguson (Jan 12)
- Re: Stupid Question: Network Abuse RFC? Randy Bush (Jan 12)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Stupid Question: Network Abuse RFC? Paul Ferguson (Jan 12)
- Re: Stupid Question: Network Abuse RFC? Christopher Morrow (Jan 12)
- Re: Stupid Question: Network Abuse RFC? Steve Atkins (Jan 12)
- Re: Stupid Question: Network Abuse RFC? Sean Donelan (Jan 12)
- Re: Stupid Question: Network Abuse RFC? Suresh Ramasubramanian (Jan 13)
- Re: Stupid Question: Network Abuse RFC? Stephane Bortzmeyer (Jan 14)
- Re: Stupid Question: Network Abuse RFC? Christopher Morrow (Jan 12)
- Re[2]: Stupid Question: Network Abuse RFC? Paul Ferguson (Jan 12)
- Re: Stupid Question: Network Abuse RFC? Leigh Porter (Jan 13)
- RE: Stupid Question: Network Abuse RFC? Paul Ferguson (Jan 12)
- RE: Stupid Question: Network Abuse RFC? Sean Donelan (Jan 13)
- Re: Stupid Question: Network Abuse RFC? Suresh Ramasubramanian (Jan 13)
- Re: Stupid Question: Network Abuse RFC? Sean Donelan (Jan 13)
- RE: Stupid Question: Network Abuse RFC? Sean Donelan (Jan 13)