[anti-abuse-wg] 2011-06 New Policy Proposal (Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE NCC Database)
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2011-06 New Policy Proposal (Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE NCC Database)
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2011-06 New Policy Proposal (Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE NCC Database)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Leo Vegoda
leo.vegoda at icann.org
Mon Nov 28 23:08:40 CET 2011
Tobias, You wrote: > > No, it doesn't really answer my question. I am no longer familiar > > with the way the RIPE NCC handles bogus data published in the > > database but as you are proposing that failure to comply with the > > policy should lead to deregistration, it seems only reasonable that > > the proposers should explicitly state what they intend to happen in > > various circumstances. > > > > I want to know whether this is proposal is going to result in large > > amounts of unmaintained data of questionable quality being > > registered, or whether some kind of maintenance process is envisaged > > and if so what that should be. > > I'm and the Task Force are not proposing anything about bogus data. The > proposal is proposing to introduce an abuse-c with some special > features. What happens with bogus data is not and can not be part of > this proposal. I fully understand that this is an issue that has to be > covered, but not within this proposal. You previously wrote, that "If there is no cooperation, this can go down until the deregistration." I don't see how a threat of deregistration fits alongside a statement that dealing with bogus data is outside the scope of your proposal. > RIPE NCC has processes in place that cover these issues and as far as I > know, is steadily working on improving these to increase data quality. > If there is a need for changes in these processes, this should be > covered by another proposal. I searched the RIPE NCC's web site and could not find any description of systemic processes for evaluating and improving the quality of registration data. Right now, I don't know whether your threat of deregistration is credible. However, I would suggest that if you want a data maintenance process to apply to the abuse-c object, then you should describe it. As you seem to want the RIPE NCC to remove the registration of address space if abuse-c's are not maintained appropriately, the standards required should be explicit and either included in the policy text or referenced by it. Regards, Leo
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2011-06 New Policy Proposal (Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE NCC Database)
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2011-06 New Policy Proposal (Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE NCC Database)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]