Re: admin-c in inetnum
- Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 19:03:53 +0300 (EET)
In real Life?
I don't think there's any use!
Instaid of admin-c I think this should be either nothing or a "last
resort-c" in case of trouble..
Almost in all cases I know of, the Admin-c does NOT have a clue of
what is going on, what are all thouse templates/objects. The admin-c
justs redirects any messages to the first available tech-c.
Kind Regards,
-Yiannis Samouhos
IPNG Group SA.
On Tue, 15 Jun 1999, Paula Caslav wrote:
>
> Dear Registries,
>
> Please note that this message is send to both the lir-wg and the
> local-ir mailing lists. We would like all discussion to take place on
> the lir-wg mailing list only.
>
> We are re-evaluating the usage of the admin-c field in the inetnum
> database object.
>
> This is what ripe-185 currently says about the admin-c field:
>
> The administrative person specified in the admin-c field must be
> physically located at the site of the network. The person does not have
> to have technical knowledge of the network. The technical person
> specified in the tech-c field may be a network support person located
> on site, but could also be a consultant that maintains the network for
> the organisation. In both cases, more than one person can be specified.
>
> We are wondering how the admin-c field is used in practice, and whether
> it is really necessary for the administrative contact to be on-site.
> Usually when something goes wrong with a network, people are meant to
> try the technical contact to get things fixed. If that person cannot be
> reached, however, the administrative contact should be somebody
> responsible for the network who can in an emergency find someone who
> can take care of the problems. The administrative person does not have
> to have technical knowledge of the network, but should know who to
> contact in case of problems. For this purpose it is not strictly
> necessary for the administrative contact to be on-site. We therefore
> propose a change to the policy- that the administrative contact should
> be somebody who is responsible for the network, but does not
> necessarily need to be on-site.
>
> Please let us know your thoughts on this, we would especially like to
> hear how these fields are used in real-life. Have you ever had the need
> to contact the admin-c? Is it usefull for that person to be on-site or
> not?
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Paula Caslav
> RIPE NCC
>
>
>
