[101585] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Stupid Question: Network Abuse RFC?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sean Donelan)
Sun Jan 13 01:47:54 2008
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 01:35:17 -0500 (EST)
From: Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <75cb24520801122158r298c348eob808c41ebd8d5100@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>>> 2142
>>>
>>> but i am surprised you asked here instead of an ietf list. here we
>> actually 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)
The great thing about standards is there are so many to choose from.
There is also ARF: Abuse Feedback Reporting Format from the Mutual
Internet Practices Assocation.
Messaging Anti-Abuse Working Group has multiple documents.
Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions has standards
on handling annoyance, fraud and harrasment.
In the US, the Federal Communications Commission, Network Reliability
Interoperability Committee published a ton of "Best Practices"
And then there are various one-shot things produced by many groups such as
the OECD, ASTA, FTC, NASD, etc.
