[acm-tf] Abuse Contact Information - Policy Proposal

On 10/Oct/11 16:50, Denis Walker wrote:

> On 10/10/11:42 4:24 PM, ale at tana.it wrote:
(oops, sorry I picked up the wrong From:)

>> On 10/Oct/11 15:40, Denis Walker wrote:
>>> "The "abuse-c:" reference to an abuse handler should make use of the
>>> hierarchical nature of the resource data to minimise the workload on
>>> resource holders and facilitate good database design."
>> 
>> +1, the above paragraph works for me (assuming abuse-mailbox does not
>>     satisfy that criterion.)
>> 
>> Do we expect that some end-users will apply for overriding an abuse-c
>> with the data of their own abuse-teams?
> 
> Just to be clear on what this means. The technical suggestion is for the
> "abuse-c:" attribute to reference a ROLE object with a "role-type:" set
> to abuse. In this ROLE object there will be an "abuse-mailbox:" attribute.

Yeah, it sounds tricky.  Right now one can set abuse-mailbox in a
number of objects.  We want to add yet another role object for abuse
contacts.  I have two questions:

1.  How does it reduce the workload on resource holder?

2.  Is there a plan to change the intended use of the abuse-mailbox
    attribute at some point in time after the introduction of abuse-c?

> Because of the hierarchical nature, if an end user has their own abuse
> team, they can reference their own abuse type ROLE object with an
> "abuse-c:" in the INETNUM object for their assignment. This will
> override the LIRs abuse team reference only for this one assignment.

Fine, I'd propose to add some text similar to the last quoted
paragraph as well.  I say /similar/ because of the LIR; do you
actually mean the mntner?