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

Hi,

>> And at the end, if all the IRT Object holders show up and say we do
>> not need the irt object anymore as soon as we have an abuse-c in
>> place, there would not be a reason to keep the irt any longer.
> 
> If this proposal was adopted then I can't see the IRT object being
> widely adopted outside of the TI community. I'm not saying that this
> is a good or a bad thing but readers of the proposal should be made
> aware of this. I think it needs to be mentioned in the proposal as an
> argument against it.

It was over all not widely adopted until now. I do not know how much IRT
Objects we ave at the moment and how much percent of the IP space they
cover.

But you are right, I think this could be added as an argument against
it. I have made a notice and I will add it with the next version.
Thanks for mentioning it.

> That would at least acknowledge how you think this proposal will
> lessen the confusion of how to publish contact information and not
> simply add another choice into the confusion.

True.

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/20111124/09fa6792/attachment.sig>