[ncc-services-wg] Feature request
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] Feature request
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] Feature request
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Max Tulyev
president at ukraine.su
Fri Sep 16 17:13:03 CEST 2005
> > But there is an agreement between us, and sometimes (due to payment > > problems, violating the agreement, spam, etc.) I need to suspend or even > > remove objects. > ...which means that you want to/have to keep responsibility to maintain the > data in the repository, right? Not right. User is keeping responsibility to maintain the data, so their mnt-by is in the objects. My aim is (at least) to bill user, and it can be done different ways (once, yearly, quarterly, by crediting user for sometime, whatever). And I need the mechanism to let that user have to pay ;) (and not to violate agreements by other ways) and remove objects if it doesn't - but NOT to keep information up to date in RIPE DB. > I don't understand this assertion, as long as there is a contractual > relationship with your LIR, there is no "alien maintainer". Please keep in > mind that an LIR is NOT required to provide PI assignment services. So if > those "customers" don't like your set of rules, they are free to find > another LIR which offers what they want. Ok, but if I want to be more user friendly than others? Or if I bored with making updates of my users' objects? > What you definitely _can_ do is add an _additional_ maintainer for your > user. Then having any credential as listed in _any_ of the maintainers > allows access. Evaluation of the auth: tags is done according to a LOGICAL > OR policy. From the beginning I said about "bad guys". If user really one - he just sends an update to remove my mntner - and I loose control on object completly. > Not to my knowledge. I think I suggested that before - in case you deploy > the multiple maintainer approch, you probably should enable the > notification mechanism(s) [in your maintainer] to each time get an alert > when your customer happens to change registration data. But notification comes a bit later, isn't it? ;) > And you may want to include an explicit provision in your contract that > prevents your customer from removing the link to _your_ maintainer object. If all users always do what is written in the contract - there was no deal about all of that at all. -- WBR, Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253 at FIDO)
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] Feature request
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] Feature request
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]