de-peering for security sake

Fri Dec 25 22:35:32 UTC 2015

Just in case I missed the /s on there:

> Maybe such a format already exists and just isn't widely used.

It does and it isn't.

http://www.x-arf.org/

--
Hugo
hugo at slabnet.com: email, xmpp/jabber
also on Signal

---- From: Clayton Zekelman <clayton at mnsi.net> -- Sent: 2015-12-25 - 14:12 ----

> Just an off the cuff thought but if the format of the abuse messages could be standardized so handling them would be semi-automated somewhat like ACNS notices, it might improve response.
>
> Maybe such a format already exists and just isn't widely used.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Dec 25, 2015, at 4:52 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike at swm.pp.se> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 25 Dec 2015, Colin Johnston wrote:
>>>
>>> why do the chinese network folks never reply and action abuse reports, normal slow speed network abuse is tolerated, but not high speed deliberate abuse albeit compromised machines
>>
>> This is not a chinese problem, this is a general ISP problem. Most ISPs do not respond to abuse reports.
>>
>> --
>> Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike at swm.pp.se
>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 870 bytes
Desc: PGP/MIME digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20151225/09ed2dd6/attachment.sig>