[db-wg] Action item 47.2: Proposal for Adding Abuse Contact

Marco,

Of course my initial assumptions are crude ones.

I believe we have to move the discussion from principled polemics
to quantities on which we can base a decision.

Can you quantify what will still be required after taking advantage
of the kind of aggregation you suggest ?  If not, are there any other
volunteers out there?

Best regards,
Niall O'Reilly

On 13 Apr 2004, at 16:59, Marco d'Itri wrote:

>> Method B:
>> Provide every inet[6]num with an appropriately configured IRT object:
> This is not a good assumption because not all inet[6]num objects need
> to be updated to be protected, only the parent object does.
> Look at IRT-SIXXS and at how many objects it protects for a simple
> example.