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/anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net/
[anti-abuse-wg] [db-wg] abuse-c + org
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] [db-wg] abuse-c + org
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Who owns 24.205.98.101?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Tobias Knecht
tk at abusix.com
Thu Jul 4 17:44:56 CEST 2013
Hi there, > As I can obviously only speak for myself, > I'd love to hear from others if it was clear to them that an abuse-c > could ONLY be linked to an organisation. This wasn't clear to me either. https://labs.ripe.net/Members/kranjbar/implementation-details-of-policy-2011-06 […]This means each resource object which is subject to, and in compliance with, RIPE Policy will inherit abuse contact information from its organisation object. Each RIPE NCC member should maintain correct contact information representing their organisation, including the new abuse details, in the organisation object.[…] […]The resource is not directly linked to an abuse contact role, but they are connected through the organisation object.[…] This is the implementation document and this was base for the decision as requested by community, since the policy text didn't go deep enough into implementation and community didn't want to do a decision based on the policy text without knowing exact implementation details. Thanks, Tobias
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] [db-wg] abuse-c + org
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Who owns 24.205.98.101?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]