[acm-tf] Abuse Contact Information - Policy Proposal
Alessandro Vesely vesely at tana.it
Mon Oct 10 19:12:04 CEST 2011
On 10/Oct/11 16:50, Denis Walker wrote: > On 10/10/11:42 4:24 PM, ale at tana.it wrote: (oops, sorry I picked up the wrong From:) >> On 10/Oct/11 15:40, Denis Walker wrote: >>> "The "abuse-c:" reference to an abuse handler should make use of the >>> hierarchical nature of the resource data to minimise the workload on >>> resource holders and facilitate good database design." >> >> +1, the above paragraph works for me (assuming abuse-mailbox does not >> satisfy that criterion.) >> >> Do we expect that some end-users will apply for overriding an abuse-c >> with the data of their own abuse-teams? > > Just to be clear on what this means. The technical suggestion is for the > "abuse-c:" attribute to reference a ROLE object with a "role-type:" set > to abuse. In this ROLE object there will be an "abuse-mailbox:" attribute. Yeah, it sounds tricky. Right now one can set abuse-mailbox in a number of objects. We want to add yet another role object for abuse contacts. I have two questions: 1. How does it reduce the workload on resource holder? 2. Is there a plan to change the intended use of the abuse-mailbox attribute at some point in time after the introduction of abuse-c? > Because of the hierarchical nature, if an end user has their own abuse > team, they can reference their own abuse type ROLE object with an > "abuse-c:" in the INETNUM object for their assignment. This will > override the LIRs abuse team reference only for this one assignment. Fine, I'd propose to add some text similar to the last quoted paragraph as well. I say /similar/ because of the LIR; do you actually mean the mntner?
[ Acm-tf Archive ]