[anti-abuse-wg] [db-wg] Options for extending "abuse-c:"
Denis Walker denis at ripe.net
Thu May 8 12:03:02 CEST 2014
Dear Piotr Looking at your reply and others I think either I am misunderstanding the problem, or everyone is misunderstanding my proposed solutions. I understood the subnet issue to mean an organisation has more than one default abuse handling team within their organisation. For example they may have three allocations and have a different abuse team for each allocation. I did not expect an organisation to have hundreds of abuse teams, so I don't think this solution would create too much of a problem. The ORGANISATION object is not going to grow too large. For End User customers who are handling abuse, they are taking over part of the management of that internet resource. They should therefore have their own ORGANISATION object referenced from that resource and an "abuse-c:" referenced from the ORGANISATION object. For this we are offering the wizard solution that will create and delete these extra objects as required. We will also provide a management tool that will provide an overview of all additional "abuse-c:" setups within your network. Regards Denis Walker Business Analyst RIPE NCC Database Team On 08/05/2014 11:51, Piotr Strzyzewski wrote: > On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 05:01:52PM +0200, Denis Walker wrote: > > Dear Denis > >> At RIPE 67 in Athens, the RIPE NCC agreed to take another look at the >> implementation of RIPE Document ripe-563, "Abuse Contact Management in >> the RIPE Database." >> >> Two issues have been identified that are seen to be difficult to >> handle with the current model - partitioned subnets within one >> organisation and adding abuse contacts to more specifics for End >> Users. The RIPE NCC has considered these two issues and found what we >> believe to be practical solutions, available within the current model. >> >> More information about these solutions and the implementation of >> "abuse-c:" is available on RIPE Labs: >> https://labs.ripe.net/Members/denis/suggestions-for-improving-abuse-handling >> >> This topic will also be raised during the Anti-Abuse Working Group >> session at RIPE 68 in Warsaw. > First of all thanks for the proposed solution. I would like to comment > both issues: > > 1. A solution to the subnet issue > > I perceive this proposed solution as a way of making a lot of mess > whenever some customer marked with additional abuse-c leaves LIR. > > 2. A solution to the End User issue > > I like this idea. However I'm not sure why at the third screen there is > RIPE-NCC-MNT mentioned, contrary to the LIR-MNT put on the fourth > screen. > > Piotr > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20140508/1ba7c35f/attachment.html>