-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 <m3aawg technical committee co-chair hat>
I agree with Suresh here -- NANOG used to almost be somewhat hostile to anyone who started discussions regarding anti-abuse and/or security issues which didn't involve routing backbone engineers. A lot of us old-timers took the hint and basically started lurking, not participating in meetings, or simply checked out of NANOG altogether . A lot of time has passed since those days, so perhaps attitudes have changed a bit with regards to operational anti-abuse issues? - - ferg </m3aawg technical committee co-chair hat> On 7/29/2015 10:14 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > <delurk> > > They come to M3AAWG on a regular basis and there’s the M3AAWG > hosting SIG that you might want to participate in. > > NANOG doesn’t always have a mail abuse (and not very many network > abuse) session on the agenda, plus just how many people doing > routing or DNS seem to even care what their colleagues down the > hall in the abuse team are doing or which conferences they attend? > > I remember a time (under the previous list management) when > discussing spam here was deemed OT and non operational - off list > warnings, suspensions and such. Ancient history I guess, but > still .. > > </delurk> > > —srs > >> On 29-Jul-2015, at 10:06 AM, Bob Evans >> <b...@fiberinternetcenter.com> wrote: >> >> Would be nice to have an RBL service that attended NANOG >> meetings. Would make for a more trusted RBL we can tell >> customers to make use. Spamhaus ever attend a NANOG meetings ? >> Thank You Bob Evans CTO > > - -- Paul Ferguson PGP Public Key ID: 0x54DC85B2 Key fingerprint: 19EC 2945 FEE8 D6C8 58A1 CE53 2896 AC75 54DC 85B2 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iF4EAREIAAYFAlW5DBsACgkQKJasdVTchbIznQD/ac/bMc2uzpkqgFNlMpP9V8Qk yJylbEqt3Nzxt2qFF7ABALwN56oZzdgL4iFFDVh6lHUjJSgcltu9xZIvEv8qbg3c =M2x5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
