[anti-abuse-wg] 2016-01 New Policy Proposal (Include Legacy Internet Resource Holders in the Abuse-c Policy)

Hi Piotr,

We’re happy to outline some high-level approaches for how we might meet 
the requirements of the proposal. Please note that details of the actual 
implementation and potential limitations will need further study and 
will be covered in the impact analysis. We will seek guidance from the 
RIPE community on which particular approach it would like us to take — 
whether this ends up being a variation on one of the approaches 
mentioned below, or something different altogether.

With this in mind, we would like to share the following information to 
support the WG’s discussion.

The RIPE Database currently contains ~70,200 inetnum objects and ~700 
aut-num objects with the status LEGACY. Of these, around 11,900 have an 
organisation object referenced, with around 3,900 of these organisation 
objects having an abuse-c attribute in place. This means that around 17% 
of the resource objects have an organisation object and around 5.5% have 
a reference to an abuse contact.

One possible approach could be to add the abuse-c attribute to existing 
organisation objects. This could be done in a similar way to how it was 
done for resources that were allocated or assigned by the RIPE NCC. 
Resources without an organisation object would not have an abuse contact.

The mandatory database update that Erik mentioned could be another 
possible approach. Whenever a resource with the status LEGACY is 
updated, it must have a reference to an organisation object with the 
abuse-c attribute to perform this update. Resources that are not updated 
will not get an abuse contact.

A third approach would add abuse-c references to all organisation 
objects held by legacy holders. The RIPE NCC would need to contact these 
holders of 67,000 objects, of which 59,000 have no organisation object. 
Taking into account our experience from implementing 2007-01, “Direct 
Internet Resource Assignments to End Users from the RIPE NCC”, we would 
expect a significant amount of manual work with this approach. The RIPE 
NCC is currently unable to enforce updates on legacy resources.

We hope this helps with your discussion of the proposal.

Kind regards

Marco Schmidt
Policy Development Officer
RIPE NCC

On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 18:49:41 +0100, Piotr Strzyzewski wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 10:06:50AM +0100, Marco Schmidt wrote:
>
> Marco
>
> > A new RIPE Policy proposal, "Include Legacy Internet Resource 
> Holders in
> > the Abuse-c Policy", is now available for discussion.
> >
> > The goal of this proposal is to extend RIPE Document ripe-563, "Abuse
> > Contact Management in the RIPE Database", to Legacy Internet Resource
> > Holders.
> >
> > You can find the full proposal at:
> >
> > https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2016-01
> >
> > We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to
> > <anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net> before 26 February 2016.
>
> Would you be so kind and publish possible approaches to deal with the
> requirements of this proposal. It will be a benefit for the members of
> this WG to see how NCC perceive this proposal.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Piotr
>
> -- 
> gucio -> Piotr Strzyżewski
> E-mail: Piotr.Strzyzewski at polsl.pl
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20160129/9d9cdbc0/attachment.html>