[acm-tf] Abuse Contact Information - Policy Proposal

HI all

What I had in mind for the technical proposal was to preserve the
hierarchical and authorisation model from the IRT object for the
role-types ABUSE and IRT.

So to add a reference to your ABUSE ROLE or IRT ROLE will need
authentication. Then you can control who asserts that you will handle
these issues for their address space.

With the hierarchy, as with the IRT object now, a whois query can search
up the hierarchy of INET(6)NUM objects looking for the most specific
object that contains the attribute "irt-c:" or "abuse-c:" and can then
return the referenced ROLE object.

But I would also like to suggest that we don't make this the default
query behaviour. As we move forward with new web forms and programmable
APIs the basic queries should become more simple. In the past we made a
query for an INET(6)NUM object also return IRT objects by default. Then
we had to introduce new query flags to negate the new default as many
users did not want the extra 'baggage' on a simple query.

We have the Abuse Finder that can do all the necessary queries
internally to find the information from the hierarchical data. We can
also make this functionality available through the query API. We can do
the same for IRT data. Then it is easy for users to find this
information as a one off with the web forms or use the API to process
batches of data. But now users who only want IP address information
won't be burdened with all the extra baggage.

Some more food for thought.

cheers
denis


On 30/09/11:40 4:01 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> This would be ideal because doing away with it might cause breakage
> elsewhere.
> 
> I would suggest abuse contact information for AS contacts, mnt-by etc
> contacts too where relevant.
> 
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 2:49 AM, Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet
> <Woeber at cc.univie.ac.at <mailto:Woeber at cc.univie.ac.at>> wrote:
> 
> 
>     For a technical aspect: do we (for hierarchically managed address space)
>     intend to preserve the current irt: relevance/coverage and the
>     associated
>     lookup mechanics for the proposed policy and implementation?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists at gmail.com <mailto:ops.lists at gmail.com>)