[anti-abuse-wg] Proposal: Publish effective users' abuse-c

Hi Angel

On Sat, 22 Jan 2022 at 21:47, Ángel González Berdasco
<angel.gonzalez at incibe.es> wrote:
>
> Alessandro Vesely wrote:
> > > > And, if yes, would it be acceptable by the resource holder or are
> > > > there
> > > > contractual impediments? Finally, if feasibility is ok, would
> > > > operators
> > > > take advantage of it or is it only me? >
> > >
> > > If you are talking about adding extra abuse addresses to assignment
> > > objects by agreement with the resource holder, as I explained, that
> > > is
> > > possible now by simply adding an abuse-c to the assignment .
> >
> >
> > Except that I don't have write access to the assignment object.
> >
> >
> > Best
> > Ale
>
>
> I'm not an expert on all the supported RIPE db details, but I think you
> could have an abuse contact object, that you could modify,

This bit is possible. The ROLE object containing the "abuse-mailbox:"
can be maintained by the end user so they can set their own email
address and change it whenever they wish.


> with the
> main resource linking to your abuse contact plus the ISP one.

This bit is not possible. The "abuse-c:" attribute is 'single'. So the
resource object can only ever reference one abuse contact.

cheers
denis
co-chair DB-WG


>
> I find that abuse contacts are fairly static ones (if not directly
> following rfc2142), so the client need to write to it is probably not a
> very relevant use case. Maybe some weird setup, such as if you wanted
> to present a dynamic abuse contact that changed every day-
>
> --
> INCIBE-CERT - Spanish National CSIRT
> https://www.incibe-cert.es/
>
> PGP keys: https://www.incibe-cert.es/en/what-is-incibe-cert/pgp-public-keys