Shawn Somers wrote:
Anyone that intentionally uses address space in a manner that they know will cause it to become contaminated should be denied on any further address space requests.
I couldn't disagree more with this kind of heckler's veto proposal. RBL operators should not be permited to set registry policy, even indirectly. The point of an RBL is that it operates consensually. I choose to use an RBL to filter something because I agree with the RBL's policy decisions. There is nothing inherently wrong with being added to an RBL, it simply indicates that the RBL's operators felt you met their policy for inclusion. If someone wants to make an RBL that lists people with "bad ideas", they are welcome to. Those who agree with them can have a "bad idea"-free internet. But it does not follow that there's any reason to punish those on the RBL, even if they do so intentionally, and even if that RBL listen would burden other owners of the block. Of course, they should not be permitted to launder their blocks either. Just as registries should not impose costs on people just for getting listed in an RBL, they should not impose costs on RBL-operators by helping people evade earned listings and forcing re-listings. DS