[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 ]
Adrian
ripe-wg-antiabuse at kyubu.de
Tue Nov 29 12:41:33 CET 2011
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 12:24:10PM +0100, Tobias Knecht wrote: Hi, > In my opinion it does not make any sense to include implementation > details into an policy. Two reasons for that. Nobody cares about the > implementation details in 10 years when things are in place. This would > pollute the policy. And second, what happens if another proposal coming > up in 5 years changes the whole design of database? I am aware of that. I think It would be fine for everyone, if the proposal contains a reference to a document which defines this. > I do not want to mix up the fact of going to London (introducing the > abuse-c) with the fact on how to go to London (how to implement things). Yet, it should be defined to make sure everybody _is_ in London on Dec. 10. > I'm against every team/member/robot should figure that out themselves. So you are proposing a kind of "one-size-fits-all" on how to process data internally. I am curious if this works. Cheers, Adrian
- 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 ]