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

Tobias Knecht <tk at abusix.com> writes:

Hello Tobias,

nice to see a progress in this area, coming in the form of a
proposal. Other people in this thread have more or less covered my
questions. However, it is my general feeling that while the essence of
the idea was explained in the thread it is not reflected well in the
proposal wording. To me only by reading the proposal it is not clear
that

- the proposed approach is to replace all other alternatives and become
  THE reference point for abuse contacts

- what exactly the transition period will be and what might be required
  by the relevant users and the RIPE NCC (this might also be added as an
  argument opposing the proposal) 

- what exactly happens in case someone does not comply after the
  transition period

I also think that it is a good idea the rational of the Task Force
to come up with this solution be presented in the policy text. 
Thanks for all your work and of course I think that the proposal moves
toward the right direction. I only feel that the proposal wording
needs some extra work.  

Just my 2 cents :) 

Regards,

Kostas

> Hello all,
>
> thanks for the already ongoing discussion about the new abuse contact
> policy proposal. I will try to clarify some things.
>
> We had some really technical discussions about this with database people
> from RIPE NCC and came up with this idea.
>
> So let's have a look at it.
>
> If we use a person object as an example, this person object can be
> referenced for example by an admin-c or tech-c attribute at the moment.
>
> In future it can be referenced by the abuse-c as well, BUT to create
> this reference the person objects needs to have an abuse-mailbox
> attribute. If there is no abuse-mailbox attribute it can not be
> referenced by the abuse-c. This will be done by the business logic.
>
> Same when you query for an ip range - admin-c, tech-c and abuse-c can be
> the same person, but output will show an abuse-mailbox attribute in the
> abuse-c part.
>
> So at the end it is only a matter, if the attributes requested by the
> business rules are existing for the intended use of the object.
>
>
> I will answer the other questions on the mailing list directly. Just
> wanted to give a real quick overview about the technical idea of the
> Task Force and RIPE NCC.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tobias

-- 
Kostas Zorbadelos		
twitter:@kzorbadelos		http://gr.linkedin.com/in/kzorba 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
()  www.asciiribbon.org - against HTML e-mail & proprietary attachments
/\