[db-wg] Proposal: Abuse-C as a Reference

Niall O'Reilly wrote:
> 
> On 6 May 2004, at 13:14, Ulrich Kiermayr wrote:
> 
>> That is where the -c kicks in. and for a good solution, id prefer a 
>> shell -liner (similar to the one i presented in january) to update all 
>> these (at once). I think this is bearable for the NOCs that care.
> 
> 
> Fine.  That makes it less onerous, but why would I want to add
> 
>     abuse-c: NO8
> 
> to every object where I already have
> 
>     tech-c: NO8
> 
> ?
> 
> I don't see the gain.

But what if I want.

       abuse-c:     UVABU1-RIPE

everywhere where I have

       tech-c:       UVNA1-RIPE

because Abuse is handled by someone else that technical Issues on the 
Network.

And I see gain here. where es you do not loose something if you like to 
achieve the first.

Hmm (I think there are a lot of Inetnums out there where admin-c == 
tech-c at the moment; where is the gain in that?)

lG uk
-- 
Ulrich Kiermayr         Zentraler Informatikdienst der Universitaet Wien
Network - Security - ACOnet-CERT   Universitaetsstrasse 7, 1010 Wien, AT

eMail:      ulrich.kiermayr at univie.ac.at       Tel: (+43 1) 4277 / 14104
PGP Key-ID: 0xA8D764D8                         Fax: (+43 1) 4277 /  9140