a few matters about security and consistency

Hi,

I'll follow up on one of your points, and partly echo what Daniel
Karrenberg said in his reply:

> What scared me was the great amount of bounced mail we got back
> from the 900 mails we sent. I think at least 10% did not
> exist. Besides that we got a lot of replies like 'hey don't
> bother me, I don't work there anymore'. Why doesn't RIPE test
> periodically if email adresses still work?

10%?  That's better than I had feared...

It's possible you meant "RIPE NCC" when you said "RIPE".  If so,
that is probably because it's not the RIPE NCC which maintains
the data in the RIPE database, and they have a long-standing
policy of not modifying the real data in the database (IMHO a
wise decision).  So, doing the checks would make it necessary to
hunt down who to contact about the contents of the database
objects, something which can be troublesome for objects which are
not marked with "mnt-by".

Regards,

- Håvard