[anti-abuse-wg] [db-wg] RIPE NCC's proposed implementation of Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE Database

Hi Kaveh, et.al,

I'm trying to figure out what I need to do to benefit from the abuse-c
initiative with minimal impact to our documentation and processes.

On 19.11.2012 10:38 AM, Kaveh Ranjbar wrote:
> Yes, in the data entry side a little bit more effort is required, but
> as we have mentioned at
> (https://labs.ripe.net/Members/kranjbar/implementation-details-of-policy-2011-06),
> there are two main reasons for that:
> 
> a) This models the reality, in almost every case we know of, abuse
> handling is a role within an organisation. On he other hand attaching
> an email address to a resource is creating an arbitrary link.
>
> b) Operationally it is a lot more feasible for our members and users
> to enter data and more importantly to maintain this data over time if
> it is centralised in an entity modelled after their real work setup.

While rolling out IPv6 we (must) document the assignments.  This can (as
far as I known) either be done by a covering inet6num object with an
"assignment-size" and an internal documentation or by having an inet6num
object for every assignment.

With the later we can have an "abuse-mailbox" in a role object linking
to "tech-c" (and "admin-c") of the inet6num object.

So this is what we are doing today (create a role-object with
abuse-mailbox etc. per role/customer/participant and link to it from
admin-c and tech-c in the inet[6]num objects).

With this new schema we need to create an additional organisation object
just to link from the inet[6]num object (through "org" and the
organisation object) to the (already existing) role object.  In the
additional organisation object we copy the address and e-mail
information from the role object, because these two fields are mandatory
in both objects.  So we need to keep track of this information in two
objects.

Please see an example scheme here with the mandatory fields:


inet6num:        2001:db8:1337::/48
~~~~~~~~~
netname:         blubb-net1
descr:           network of blubb
country:         DE
admin-c:         >--------------------+
tech-c:          >--------------------+
status:          ASSIGNED             |
mnt-by, changed, source: ...          |
(org):           >------------------+ |
                                    | |
                                    | |
organisation:    ORG-BLUBB-RIPE <---+ |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~                         |
abuse-c:         >------------------+ |
org-name:        blubb              | |
org-type:        OTHER              | |
address:         <copy from         | |
e-mail:           role object>      | |
mnt-ref:         ...                | |
mnt-by, changed, source: ...        | |
                                    | |
                                    | |
role:            blubb              | |
~~~~~        	                    | |
address:         fantasialand       | |
nic-hdl:         blubb-RIPE  <------+-+
e-mail:          role-email at example.com
admin-c:         >----------------------->  person:
tech-c:          >----------------------->  person(s):
mnt-by, changed, source: ...
abuse-mailbox:   abuse at example.com


Did I miss something?  Can I do this easier?
Or is it mandatory/best practice to create an organisation object for
each customer/party anyway ?

If not, I would be happy to link directly from an "abuse-c" in the
inet[6]num object to the role account (in parallel to tech-c and admin-c).


Many thanks for help,
	Tim