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] 2011-06 Discussion Period extended until 7 May 2012 (Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE NCC Database)
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2011-06 Discussion Period extended until 7 May 2012 (Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE NCC Database)
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2011-06 Discussion Period extended until 7 May 2012 (Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE NCC Database)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Gilles Massen
gilles.massen at restena.lu
Tue Apr 17 09:53:53 CEST 2012
Hello, > Changes in version 2.0 include: > > - Overall rewording > - Description of the use of "abuse-c:" and "abuse-mailbox:" on differing > RIPE Database objects > - Removal of references to a transition period What I still miss is a clear positioning of the IRT object vs. abuse-c. While these may not overlap completely, they certainly would to a large extend for a lot of CERTs, thus creating redundant data. So I'd join Leo on his comments that the use of the object should be clearer before creating it. If not the worst case might be that we end up with another randomly used object. Best, Gilles -- Fondation RESTENA - DNS-LU 6, rue Coudenhove-Kalergi L-1359 Luxembourg tel: (+352) 424409 fax: (+352) 422473
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2011-06 Discussion Period extended until 7 May 2012 (Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE NCC Database)
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2011-06 Discussion Period extended until 7 May 2012 (Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE NCC Database)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]