[anti-abuse-wg] 2011-06 New Policy Proposal (Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE NCC Database)

> - The PA ranges are not included in this range; I heavily suspect
> however that in the PA allocations the problem with
> incorrect/unreachable abuse details is by far the largest (think shady
> LIRs subdelegating IP space. A very common business model). This policy
> should make an effort to try to touch the PA IP space too.

Right. That is on intention. The request was to have at least on contact
for every ip address. We do not want to force every single range to
publish the data. The hierarchy will always take the most recent contact
information.

> - A reference to, or a summary of the document containing the
> ‘business rules’ would help clarify the exact requirements.

I tried to explain it in another thread today.

At the end the business rule will be responsible to check if an
abuse-maibox attribute is set and if yes, the object can be used as
abuse-c and if not, it can not be used for an abuse-c.

The whole business rule idea, gives us the opportunity to stay within
this model for whatever will show up in future.

> - As mentioned before, what in case of non-compliance? The policy
> should state, or reference to, that too.

The RIPE NCC process will start and RIPE tries to solve the issue with
the member. If there is no cooperation, this can go down until the
deregistration.

Thanks,

Tobias

-- 
abusix


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 307 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20111124/e844e93c/attachment.sig>