[db-wg] abuse-c: proposal

On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 04:30:56PM +0100, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> > > - third argument is, as many organizations do have only one IP-range, they
> > > would really find creating of new handle superflous. (well, we have 3
> > > ranges, and I think that's very easy to put e-mail to all of them)
> > 
> > They can always use the same role for all contacts.
> 
> which will overload roles with different types of data.

If your company is so small it's the same person running the registry,
doing the network and handling abuse complaints you can use the same
person/role for all contacts.

Where is the overloading in this ?
 
> > > The best would probably be, if abuse-c: would accept e-mail, or pointer to
> > > another object, so the network maintainer could decide which one to use.
> > > - Is that possible?
> > 
> > That will create more confusion as you have to check what is returned.
> 
> Agreeed. So what about abuse: email versus abuse-c: handle?

See my other mails over the past few weeks and the slides I'm mailing to
the webmaster in a few minutes :)

The problem is in 'overloading' the tag e-mail, you need to look at the
context (object) which it came in, to find in wath cases you should use
it.

To just launch yet another idea:

Implement a (client) library returning hierarchical names:

tech-c.e-mail
admin-c.e-mail
irt.e-mail
abuse-c.e-mail

There is no definite need to change the schema to incorporate new
objects/attrfibutes. There are already multple suggestions to just change
the default appearance of the data returned by a whois query.

MarcoH