[anti-abuse-wg] DRAFT: RIPE proposal - implementation of an abuse monitor system

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frank Gadegast [mailto:phade at www.powerweb.de]
> Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2010 6:42 PM
> To: Thor Kottelin
> Cc: anti-abuse-wg at postboy.ripe.net

> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: anti-abuse-wg-admin at ripe.net [mailto:anti-abuse-wg-
> > > admin at ripe.net] On Behalf Of Bradley Freeman
> > > Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2010 4:45 PM
> > > To: 'Frank Gadegast'; anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net
> >
> > > And if the only benefit is a common abuse alias, hasn't this
> has
> > > already
> > > been suggested with an abuse@ address in RFC2142 - Mailbox
> Names
> > > for Common
> > > Services, Roles and Functions which is not RIPE region
> specific?
> >
> > It is not always obvious which abuse@ domain should be selected
> for a particular IP address. I like the suggestion of routing
> reports according to the IP address of the abuse source.
> 
> Not getting it.

I apologise. Allow me to rephrase:

Any organisation to which net space is allocated or assigned may own zero, one or several Internet domains. It may be difficult to know exactly what to type on the domain side of an abuse@ address. Your proposal avoids this issue. This is an advantage of your proposal as compared with RFC 2142.

-- 
Thor Kottelin
http://www.anta.net/