Discuss mailing list

[Amunak <amunak AT amunak.net>]

I think that the last bit is there to make sure that they don't need to adhere to our policies as they are basically a separate entity that we just exchange data with. Which makes sense. They can do whatever they want - they may not even really have a TLD in the ordinary sense (so maybe abuse address doesn't even make sense for some cases). Basically any policy we want them to follow should be mentioned separately in these peering agreement requirements and that's probably fine. If they do have abuse issues or something we can always just cut them off, but we shouldn't interfere with third parties like that I think.

Amunak


On 08.11.2017 6:44, Rouben wrote:

6: NO

This needs more work. As others mentioned, some peered network will be unable to reciprocate with a T1 server... maybe a catch-all clause that says "exceptions to the above will be considered on a case-by-case basis considering the unique nature of some namespaces (e.g. crypto)."

Also this really bugs me:

"- SHOULD NOT be held accountable to OpenNIC organizational policies."

maybe not all of them, but they shouldn't be just letting anyone do anything. Each peered network should have a hostmaster/abuse process.

Rouben