[anti-abuse-wg] Policy Proposal: Frequent Update Reminder

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:48:48AM +0200, Tobias Knecht wrote:

Hi

Just few comments.

> 
>     a) Wrong data is published to camouflage illegal actions.
> 
>     b) Wrong data is published because object owners forget to update

I do think that better words are:
- outdated instead of wrong,
- maintainers or owners instead of owners (this also applies in few
  other places in the text).

>     The objects covered by this proposal are:
> 
>         - inetnum
>         - inet6num
>         - aut-num
>         - person
>         - role
> 	- org

organisation not org

> It is proposed that RIPE:

RIPE NCC not RIPE (this also applies in few other places in the text).

>         - If an object needs updating, or a new object needs to be added
>           (for example, an IRT object), the owner can do this via
>           the LIR Portal.

There are few other methods of adding/updating objects. Maybe this text
should look like this:

- Any updates or additions of new objects (for whatever reason) should
  be done if necessary.

>     Even if the owner only verifies existing data and has not made any
>     changes, the "changed" attribute in the whois database objects will
>     include the date the owner verified the object. This will give
>     users of whois an idea on how recently the object owner verified
>     the accuracy of the data.

Maybe new attribute should be considered? Right now anyone can create
any number of changed: lines with virtually any dates.
 
> 4.4 Handle non-responsive object owners in the following way:
> 
>     - Owners will have 60 days from the time of initial message
>       from APNIC to confirm that their objects are up to date.

RIPE NCC ;-) (this also applies in few other places in the text).
 
>     - If the object owner does not respond to the initial message,
>       reminder emails will be sent 10, 30 and 50 days after the
>       original email.
> 
>     - After the 60-day period has passed, if the object owner has not
>       verified their object details, APNIC will add the ranges of
>       resources maintained by the non-responsive object owner to the
>       publicly available list of resources described in 4.5.1 below.

I don't imagine clicking more than hundreds of thousands times to
confirm validation of whois objects, every X months, during 60 days.
Those numbers will apply to some LIRs. We should provide some API for
that.

>     4.5.2 Resources associated with known invalid contact details
> 
>           - This list would include resources that have been reported
>             to contain invalid contact details.

So, this list will be filled automatically after any report?

> 5.2 Disadvantages
> 
>     - No disadvantages are foreseen.

At least one - a lot of work to do for LIR staff. ;-)

Regards,
Piotr Strzyżewski

-- 
gucio -> Piotr Strzyżewski
E-mail: Piotr.Strzyzewski at polsl.pl