[db-wg] abuse-c

Hi,


I wasn't aware this object type existed, but I can see ripe-254 is from July
2002, so its not exactly new.. The current situation in my opinion is that
people (or applications) simply send their abuse complaint to all possible
email addresses showing up when doing a whois on an IP address. In many
cases such mails are never replied, which is the reason why all addresses
are used instead of just trying one, people believe there is a greater
chance for a reply this way..

This behaviour will probably not change until people feel confident that a
mail to an abuse address found on a whois is read by the actual technicians
who takes care of this.

Realistically I think the majority of inetnum objects needs to have such a
record before anything will change. Therefore I believe it has to be
mandatory for all new inetnum objects to reference an abuse address.

This irt object seems a bit complex with encryption and so on if the
intention should be for all inetnums to reference such an object. It has to
be the responsibility of the LIR maintaining the address block to ensure
endusers are not abusing the addresses. Only the LIR can create inetnum
objects for their address block (else something is very wrong!) and this way
have the ability to ensure the correct abuse address is used, so I don't see
how it can be absolutely necessary to use encryption..?!

The procedure for implementing the irt object (modify every single inetnum
object) does not exactly motivate LIRs, what about referencing an abuse
object from the maintainer object? MNT-BY is mandatory on inetnum objects,
so it should be possible for a LIR to reference all inetnum objects this way
by just adding an attribute to their maintainer object. I imagine it would
be possible for the whois to show a part of a maintainer object?

I would suggest to use something simpler than the irt object, what about a
role object or simply a person object as suggested by Adrian Kennard?

The most important has to be to have all inetnum objects referencing some
kind of abuse object, until then it will not have much effect. Once this
goal is reached it can be extended with encryption and so on if the LIRs
wants it.




Med venlig hilsen/Best regards

Christian Rasmussen
Hosting manager, jay.net a/s

Smedeland 32, 2600 Glostrup, Denmark

Email: noc at jay.net
Personal email: chr at corp.jay.net
Tlf./Phone: +45 3336 6300, Fax: +45 3336 6301

Produkter / Products:
http://hosting.jay.net

> -----Original Message-----
> From: db-wg-admin at ripe.net [mailto:db-wg-admin at ripe.net]On Behalf Of Jan
> Meijer
> Sent: 9. januar 2004 13:33
> To: Rev Adrian Kennard
> Cc: db-wg at ripe.net
> Subject: Re: [db-wg] abuse-c
>
>
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 9 Jan 2004, Rev Adrian Kennard wrote:
>
> > I am new to this mailing list, so forgive me if this has been covered
> > before.
> >
> > It seems there is a pretty clear need for an extra field in inetnum and
> > inet6num records, specifically something like an abuse-c field
> > referencing a person record.
> >
> > A lot of inetnum records I have seen have a remarks field identifying
> > the abuse ocntact, but this is in an inconsistent format making it
> > difficult to automate in any way. It also seems that a lot of network
> > administrators (admin-c) do not feel they should administer their
> > network to remove viruses, etc, and get quite annoyed when contacted
> > regarding abuse.
> >
> > What would be the procedure for proposing such a new field?
>
> It's already there :).
>
> Please check
> http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/irt-object.html
>
> and the TF-CSIRT effort to make it easier to use this:
> http://www.dfn-cert.de/team/matho/irt-object/
>
> It's not perfect but it's there.
>
> Jan
>
> --
> /~\ The ASCII                 /     Jan Meijer
> \ / Ribbon Campaign        -- --    SURFnet bv
>  X  Against HTML            /       http://www.surfnet.nl/organisatie/jm/
> / \ Email                           http://cert-nl.surfnet.nl/
>
>