[anti-abuse-wg] Loop error in APNIC whois database
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Loop error in APNIC whois database
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] vacancesloisirs.fr
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet
Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at
Tue Aug 28 18:34:06 CEST 2012
Hi Denis, thanks for the clarification! I do see 3 aspects here: 1. the registration is in the APNIC DB. While I do not see any problem at all, discussing abuse issues on the RIPE Community's anti-abuse mailing list, I am a bit hesitant to accept the potential implication that the RIPE community, or the RIPE NCC, should take the blame for something it/we do not have control of. 2. I was under the impression that in the RIPE DB, a reference to a person object was enforced, at the end of the food chain. If this is not the case right now, we MAY|SHOULD discuss the need for an amendment - but read on! 3. (violating my own item 1. :-) and) looking at the entry as quoted: there is the company's name, the postal address, an abuse@ email: and both a tel. and fax. number. So - what is the added benefit of a person's name (which could easily be Mr. Micky Mouse for the whois record :-) The reason why I am nit-picking here is as follows: imho we should encourage all parties to provide correct and useable information to get in contact if and when there's a good reason for trying to. Requiring, as a strict formality, to provide any and all particular pieces of data and in a very strict format, potentially violating good reasons for not identifying individual persons, may actually impede achievement of our goal. Wilfried. Denis Walker wrote: > Dear Wilfried, > > Putting aside the specific reason for looking up a contact in this case > and look at the wider consequence for the RIPE Database. I thought we > disallowed self referencing ROLE objects. But we only disallow creation > of self referencing ROLEs using 'AUTO-' and circular references with > ROLE A -> ROLE B -> ROLE A. > > The way the rules are now, taken to an extreme, the entire RIPE Database > could exist without a single 'real' PERSON listed. All number resources > could be anonymised by referencing self referencing ROLE objects. All > allocations, mandatory organisations for allocations, ASNs, PI > resources, routing data could be set up so that no real person takes any > responsibility for any resource, publicly. > > Of course real people still need to sign contracts to become members and > get resources, but from a public perspective everything can be totally > anonymised as the rules are now. > > Regards > Denis Walker > Business Analyst > RIPE NCC Database Group > > > On 28/08/2012 16:14, Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet wrote: > >> U.Mutlu wrote: >> >>> Because of errors in their DNS server I need to contact >>> their tech-c, not their abuse dept. >> >> >> I was under the impression that the contact for (technical) errors >> regarding DNS zone configuration is to be found in the zone's SOA >> record, as an RFC822 (or newer) field. >> >> And/or by way of the name registry and/or registrar. >> >> Where does the numbers registry information come into the picture? >> >> Wilfried >> >> >
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Loop error in APNIC whois database
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] vacancesloisirs.fr
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]