[acm-tf] Abuse Contact Information - Policy Proposal

On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 01:04:49PM +0200, Tobias Knecht wrote:

> I fully agree to the part with not promoting design information within
> the proposal. How RIPE NCC is keeping their things together is imho
> nothing that should be under discussion. As far as I know we do not
> discuss which hardware they use, which programming language they use and
> we should not discuss which database and which database model they use.

i beg to differ: nobody is talking about HW or programming language, but the
type of objects and their relations has always been subject to community
discussion and i believe this fruitful interaction is part of the reason
why the RIPE DB is successful.

> I agree with Denis that we can talk through this in this TF, but not in
> the community. Community had the chance to be part of the TF and join
> the discussion. That's why we are here, because we took the chance.

This is not how this community works.  Our output is subject to review
and we would be ill advised not to take operational considerations
into account.

"design" is not about implementation details, it is about concepts.
And should we suggest to exploit the hierarchy in registered objects
it is part of our job to define what operators can expect.

-Peter