<html> <head> <meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> <tt>Hi Sebastian</tt> <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 21/04/2017 14:09, Sebastian Wiesinger wrote: </div> <blockquote cite="mid:%3C20170421120903.GB14027@danton.fire-world.de%3E" type="cite"> <pre wrap="">* denis walker via db-wg <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:db-wg@ripe.net"><db-wg@ripe.net></a> [2017-04-20 13:35]: </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2017 11:34:22 +0000 (UTC) From: denis walker <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:ripedenis@yahoo.co.uk"><ripedenis@yahoo.co.uk></a> To: Sebastian Wiesinger <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:sebastian@karotte.org"><sebastian@karotte.org></a>, <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:db-wg@ripe.net">"db-wg@ripe.net"</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:db-wg@ripe.net"><db-wg@ripe.net></a> Subject: Re: [db-wg] NWI-7 proposal for fixing "abuse-c:" problems Reply-To: denis walker <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:ripedenis@yahoo.co.uk"><ripedenis@yahoo.co.uk></a> Message-ID: <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:1214539347.1395203.1492688062209@mail.yahoo.com"><1214539347.1395203.1492688062209@mail.yahoo.com></a> X-Mailer: WebService/1.1.9408 YahooMailNeo Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:48.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/48.0 Hi Sebastian </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=""> </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">Thanks for the comments. This proposal is just an idea that would preserve some of the benefits of the "abuse-c:" design, but I am not going to push hard for it. However, let me at least clear up some of the points you made. (Sorry for it all being top posted but yahoo doesn't allow for inline comments.) </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=""> Hi Denis, sorry I'm having a really hard time reading your mails, I have to do extensive reformatting. Could you perhaps use a mail client that doesn't produce a wall of text?</pre> </blockquote> I will try Thunderbird as a front end, but it still goes through yahoo and may still get messed up.... <blockquote cite="mid:%3C20170421120903.GB14027@danton.fire-world.de%3E" type="cite"> <pre wrap=""> </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">We already have "sponsoring-org:", so a "contact-org:" would be fine. </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=""> Why is having three fields named *some*-org better than two? That the field is called contact-org or abuse-c or abuse-mailbox should not matter, right? </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">Indirection and inheritance can sometimes involve complexity at the raw data level, but all of that complexity can be hidden behind simple to use tools. So I don't think that in itself is a show stopper. </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=""> Will you build the tools so that everyone can use them? If you can build tools you can work around almost anything but I'm thinking about people who edit the object on the webportal to add an abuse contact or send it to the mail interface.</pre> </blockquote> No one supports the idea so I don't think it matters now. <blockquote cite="mid:%3C20170421120903.GB14027@danton.fire-world.de%3E" type="cite"> <pre wrap=""> </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">"Instead just adding an "abuse-c:" field to an object is easily understandable."I agree this is easily understandable. But it breaks one of the principles of the "abuse-c:" design...the "abuse-c:" attribute only exists in one place, the ORGANISATION object. Now it will be in four object types...ORGANISATION, INETNUM, INET6NUM, AUT-NUM. Before we implemented "abuse-c:" the "abuse-mailbox:" attribute was allowed in five object types...PERSON, ROLE, MNTNER, ORGANISATION, IRT. This created the mess that lead to the design of "abuse-c:" But if this is the way we go forward then we can avoid previous pitfalls with good management tools. </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=""> What management tools do you mean? Every LIR would have to implement these if we don't make it easy enough to use it by hand.</pre> </blockquote> After 14 years of analysing how people use this database and play around with it's algebraic, raw data and providing technical support when things go wrong, I foresee potential issues when we apply apparent 'simple solutions'. But lets wait and see what the final consensus is and then consider possible consequences and address them. <blockquote cite="mid:%3C20170421120903.GB14027@danton.fire-world.de%3E" type="cite"> <pre wrap=""> In my mind the goal is to add the attribute at the level it is used and that would be inet(6)num and maybe autnum. This was not done before. </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">I think you misunderstood the point about email being (in)sufficient information. I agree almost all abuse reports come via email. My point was, what happens if the complainant gets no response to the email complaint? If the email address is all the information they have, then they hit a brick wall. They don't know what organisation, company, individual sits behind that email address. But again, if this is the way we move forward then we have to put our business analyst and software engineering hats on and solve the problem by providing better information to consumers of this data. </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=""> If the complaint gets no response by mail then most people will not go further anyway. What good would it do them to know which person or company sits behind that mailadress? They didn't get a response. *If* they want to dig deeper they can still look at the org object or admin/tech contacts and so on.</pre> </blockquote> I was asking a question, not giving an answer. I was hoping people who process abuse reports might have contributed towards an answer. But again you are assuming people who make abuse complaints understand the structure of this database. I don't know if that is true or not. <blockquote cite="mid:%3C20170421120903.GB14027@danton.fire-world.de%3E" type="cite"> <pre wrap=""> </pre> <blockquote type="cite"> <pre wrap="">We will accept the consensus view of the community in these talks. If there is a clear consensus to add "abuse-c:" to resource objects, that is what we will ask the RIPE NCC to implement. </pre> </blockquote> <pre wrap=""> At least that would be my preferred solution if noone has a simpler one.</pre> </blockquote> Noted. cheers denis co-chair DB-WG <blockquote cite="mid:%3C20170421120903.GB14027@danton.fire-world.de%3E" type="cite"> <pre wrap=""> Regards Sebastian </pre> </blockquote> </body> </html>