[anti-abuse-wg] 2010-08 New Policy Proposal (Abuse contact information)

On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 01:05:51PM +0200, Kostas Zorbadelos wrote:
> On Wednesday 10 November 2010 12:57:31 Marco Hogewoning wrote:
> > On 10 nov 2010, at 11:30, Sander Steffann wrote:
> > >> That being said, I still think a single canonical place to store abuse
> > >> handling information is A Very Good Thing.
> > >
> > > +1
> >
> > Be careful of what you wish for, maybe somebody can produce the same stats
> > as I did back in 2004:
> >
> > - number of inet(6)num covered by IRT
> > - number of inet(6)num covered by abuse-mailbox attributes
> > - Number of inet(6)num containing a remarks field with the words
> > 'complaint' or 'abuse' in it
> >
> > Creating a 'single point' makes it implicit that others should disappear
> > and you might throw away a load of data and you don't know what you will
> > get back for it.
> 
> I am missing your point here. These might be a lot of garbage data. What is 
> wrong about have ONE consistent way to publish abuse contacts? Don't you find 
> this "A Good Thing"?

And how anybody could stop publishing this kind of info in remark
fields?

Piotr

-- 
gucio -> Piotr Strzyżewski
E-mail: Piotr.Strzyzewski at polsl.pl