[anti-abuse-wg] Updated Document: Abuse Contact Data Sets

Thanks for your quick feedback, Michele.

On 21/1/16 12:05, Michele Neylon - Blacknight wrote:
> Brian
> 
> Thanks for sharing this
> 
> A couple of notes:
> 
> - there seems to be an assumption that “quality” and “responsiveness” are somehow linked. 

That wasn't the intention. We will clarify this in the text.

> - the flow for ccTLD domain lookups seems to jump from the IANA DB directly to the CERT, which seems like overkill. The whois data *might* provide contact information that would be useful or failing that the hostname lookup would give the hosting provider / ISP. 
> (or maybe I’ve misread the chart?)

This was just meant a one example of how the process could go from query
to data sets to result. We will try to clarify this in the chart itself
or add some explanatory text.

Regards,
Mirjam


> 
> Regards
> 
> Michele
> 
> --
> Mr Michele Neylon
> Blacknight Solutions
> Hosting, Colocation & Domains
> http://www.blacknight.host/
> http://blog.blacknight.com/
> http://ceo.hosting/ 
> Intl. +353 (0) 59  9183072
> Direct Dial: +353 (0)59 9183090
> -------------------------------
> Blacknight Internet Solutions Ltd, Unit 12A,Barrowside Business Park,Sleaty
> Road,Graiguecullen,Carlow,Ireland  Company No.: 370845
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 20/01/2016, 16:22, "anti-abuse-wg on behalf of Brian Nisbet" <anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net on behalf of brian.nisbet at heanet.ie> wrote:
> 
>> Colleagues,
>>
>> The group working on this document (L. Aaron Kaplan, Mirjam Kühne, 
>> Christian Teuschel) have produced a new draft. This draft contains a 
>> number of updates, based on feedback from the community.
>>
>> The main changes are:
>>
>> - clarified terminology such as abuse handler, security incident,
>> registrant, national CERT, etc.
>> - clarified problem statement
>> - removed specific mentioning of name-based services in the problem
>> statement
>> - used "European" examples
>> - added API details for Nation CSIRT DB
>> - elaborated on conclusion and next steps
>>
>> This document was sent to me earlier in the week, but for various 
>> reasons I didn't manage to forward it on to you all until now. With the 
>> TF-CSIRT meeting happening next week it would be great if we could 
>> gather any further feedback before the end of this week, but I realise 
>> that is quite a short term period, for which I apologise. So I'm not 
>> proposing a hard cut-off by end of day on Friday, but I think it would 
>> be extremely useful if people could try to post to the list before then.
>>
>> This would hopefully allow the authors to go to the TF-CSIRT meeting 
>> with a very nearly final draft and then complete it shortly afterwards.
>>
>> Certainly I would propose no more than a working week to receive other 
>> feedback, so we'd be looking at the end of Wednesday 27th.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Brian
>> Co-Chair, RIPE AA-WG