[anti-abuse-wg] [db-wg] objection to RIPE policy proposal

>> I am also impressed and concerned with the old, inopportune and
>> improper posture of the gentlemen Randy Bush and Gert Doering.
> Always happy to impress the young.

and i always love ad hominem attacks; a sure sign of a loser.

> I've never said people should not handle abuse, or publish abuse
> contacts (and if you've ever dealt with us, you know that we take all
> abuse reports very seriously, and of course, our published abuse-c: is
> read and acted upon).
> 
> I disagree with implementation details of abuse-c: (namely the
> mandatory indirection via an organisation: object) and with the claims
> that it is a strict requirement "for the registry functions of the
> RIPE NCC" - which it isn't.  The registry needs to know who they have
> a contract with, and that's something abuse-c: is orthogonal to - it
> does not make a difference either way.

yup.  but i do think the confusion is at least partly that the ncc
database does not make clear the differentiation between the the ncc
registry data and the less formal member data, kinda called the irr
elsewhere.

i think arin may be the only rir which still has clear separation; they
just run the registry and let the irr go loose.  and before one asserts
that is the cause of bad irr data in noam, note that afrinic, apnic, and
lacnic all mix the datasets and have sucky irr data; except for ocd
japan, of course.  i conject that irr maintenance is a cultural thing.

randy