This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/db-wg@ripe.net/
[db-wg] New RIPE Whois Database Manual
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] New RIPE Whois Database Manual
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] New RIPE Whois Database Manual
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Philippe Bourcier
philippe at cyberabuse.org
Mon Oct 24 08:34:32 CEST 2005
Re, > > > 2 - "e-mail" field of the IRT object >Those morons will just add -B to their scripts. So true... >> 3 - "abuse-mailbox" field of the IRT object >> Why would an IRT object specify an abuse-mailbox, while there's=20 >> already an e-mail field that is mandatory ? >> An IRT's e-mail address is an abuse-mailbox by definition, isn't it ? >Just use it instead of the email attribute, if it exists. Is it really impossible to recognize that this is an error and that the IRT e-mail field should be switched to "not-hidden" (and I'm sure all IRTs agree on this one) ? If "-c" flag is merged with the "classic output", then the scripts that catch every email in the RIPE whois will catch the IRT one, which is in fact what everybody wants... Another solution is to ask all the IRT to add an abuse-mailbox field, but I wonder how you are going to explain to them why... Sincerely, Philippe Bourcier
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] New RIPE Whois Database Manual
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] New RIPE Whois Database Manual
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]