nanog mailing list archives
Re: Past policies versus present and future uses
From: Rich Kulawiec <rsk () gsp org>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2021 09:02:43 -0500
On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 11:26:51AM -0500, Rob McEwen wrote:
Is DDoS-Guard without blame? Probably not, but them hosting some occasional criminals is NOT UNLIKE EVERY OTHER GLOBAL NETWORK!
You might wish to scroll back up to the message I sent here on January 21 with the Subject "DDOS-Guard" and note the list of domains that I provided. That's not a network with "occasional" issues, that's a network with pervasive issues.
By these SAME standards, many other large and famous networks should lose most or much of their IPs too!
Yes, that's exactly what should happen. "Large and famous" operations, by their very nature, have plenty of money to spend on large, trained, competent, empowered, 24x7 abuse staff as well as on customer screening -- and should do that. Those that don't should not have their problematic allocations confiscated: they should have *all* their allocations confiscated. Why? Well, first because there are no acceptable excuses for running an operation like that. NONE. And second, because when those operations refuse to pay the costs of keeping abusers out, you know who *does* pay for that? We do. ---rsk
Current thread:
- Re: Nice work Ron, (continued)
- Re: Nice work Ron J. Hellenthal via NANOG (Jan 24)
- Re: Nice work Ron Masataka Ohta (Jan 24)
- Re: Nice work Ron John Sage (Jan 24)
- Past policies versus present and future uses Matthew Petach (Jan 24)
- Re: Past policies versus present and future uses John Sage (Jan 24)
- Re: Past policies versus present and future uses JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG (Jan 24)
- Re: Past policies versus present and future uses Rob McEwen (Jan 25)
- Re: Past policies versus present and future uses Rob McEwen (Jan 25)
- Re: Past policies versus present and future uses Rubens Kuhl (Jan 25)
- Re: Past policies versus present and future uses Rob McEwen (Jan 25)
- Re: Past policies versus present and future uses Rich Kulawiec (Jan 26)
- Re: Nice work Ron Töma Gavrichenkov (Jan 22)
- Re: Nice work Ron Mark Andrews (Jan 22)
- Re: Nice work Ron George Herbert (Jan 22)
- Re: Nice work Ron Alain Hebert (Jan 21)
- Re: Nice work Ron Ethan (Jan 21)