This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[anti-abuse-wg] Policy Proposal: Place for Abuse Contact Information
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Policy Proposal: Place for Abuse Contact Information
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Time Stamps (?)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Piotr Strzyzewski
Piotr.Strzyzewski at polsl.pl
Thu Sep 30 14:16:51 CEST 2010
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:48:56AM +0200, Tobias Knecht wrote: Just few comments. > Currently within the RIPE region, the biggest problem for network > operators is to know the best place to publish abuse contact > information. (IRT, abuse-mailbox, remark-fields, and in addition to > that, in which object they should publish them?) On the other hand > abuse reporting parties having a huge problem by finding a correct > abuse contact in the variety of possibilities. > > Since there is a specialized object (IRT) for abuse contacts, this > should be mandatory, to stop the uncontrolled growth. Your arguments could be summarize like that: "there is a mess". Making irt object mandatory has nothing to do with cleaning it up. Yet, I do think that making it the only place of putting "abuse contact" is ok. > 4.3 Delete abuse-mailbox fields in all objects that do not define an > IRT, and delete the trouble field everywhere until end of 2012. I don't agree to delete the trouble field everywhere since those are in remarks right now and remarks are just free text remarks. ;-) > - Networks will be able to supply their own, direct contact > information for abuse departments. They are able to do that right now. Nothing new. > - Abuse complaints will not be sent to the "wrong" contact any > more. Ekhm. Don't take me wrong. I know only one well known organization which sends me abuse complaints using wrong data. It is abusix.org. And I do have proper contact information put in person/role/inetnum/aut-num objects for all of my customers and I do a regular cleanup and updates. > 5.2 Disadvantages > > - No disadvantages are foreseen. A lot of work for LIR staff. > 7. Effect on NIRs > ------------------ > > It would be of benefit to the whole Internet community if NIRs were to > implement a similar abuse contact scheme in their whois databases. But > this would be another proposal. Do we have NIRs in RIPE region?? ;-) Best regards, Piotr Strzyżewski -- gucio -> Piotr Strzyżewski E-mail: Piotr.Strzyzewski at polsl.pl
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Policy Proposal: Place for Abuse Contact Information
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Time Stamps (?)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]