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

On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 12:24:10PM +0100, Tobias Knecht wrote:

Hi,

> In my opinion it does not make any sense to include implementation
> details into an policy. Two reasons for that. Nobody cares about the
> implementation details in 10 years when things are in place. This would
> pollute the policy. And second, what happens if another proposal coming
> up in 5 years changes the whole design of database?

I am aware of that. I think It would be fine for everyone, if the proposal contains a reference to a document which defines this.

> I do not want to mix up the fact of going to London (introducing the
> abuse-c) with the fact on how to go to London (how to implement things).

Yet, it should be defined to make sure everybody _is_ in London on Dec. 10.

> I'm against every team/member/robot should figure that out themselves.

So you are proposing a kind of "one-size-fits-all" on how to process data internally. I am curious if this works.

Cheers, Adrian