<<< Chronological >>> Author Index    Subject Index <<< Threads >>>

RE: Abuse address attribute in RIPE whois?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-anti-spam-wg@localhost [
> Behalf Of Valentin Hilbig <snip> > We do not need DB support. All we need are some well-defined well-known > well-published and self-declaring tags within the descr:, remark: or > likewise lines. I'm afraid I would disagree with this. I work for an RIR (APNIC), but in a communications capacity, not a technical one. The suggestion above is a reasonable solution in technical terms, but the problem goes well beyond the technical sphere. Part of my job at APNIC is answering the spam and hacking complaints that pour into our mailboxes everyday. From this experience, it is clear to me that the whois database is something that was created for a technical audience, but which is now overwhlemingly used by non-technical people. And they don't understand it. In fact, even tech-c and admin-c are next to useless for most non-technical people, because they have no idea what those words mean. Anyway, even if they do look at those fields, they also see at the bottom of the object "source: APNIC". So in the minds of many Internet citizens, we are obviously the spammer. Before anyone says "documentation", I can also add that we have good standard replies and FAQs, but stubborn people do not want to go elsewhere to read something. Anyway, they don't want to trust what we tell them because they think we are spammers. ;-) In short, my basic point is that it is no longer good enough to consider the whois database as a resource for the technical community. It now has a much broader communication role. Changing the whois database in order to improve the efficiency of abuse reporting will not work unless the changes affect its fundamental user-friendliness. Cheers - Gerard Ross

<<< Chronological >>> Author    Subject <<< Threads >>>