<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<font size="+1"><tt>Hi Gilles<br>
I have just submit a proposal to the DB WG on the cleanup
process. There was some discussion a long time ago on converting
IRT object into ROLE objects, but that discussion was never
brought to any conclusion. I don't propose to include that in
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 07/05/2015 19:06, Gilles Massen
<blockquote cite="mid:554B9B9C.firstname.lastname@example.org" type="cite">
On 5/5/2015 15:59 , denis walker wrote:
<pre wrap="">The first two steps are done, but the last one seems to have been
overlooked. The idea of "abuse-c:" was to create one single place/way of
documenting abuse contact details. So far all that has been achieved is
to add a fourth way to document it. All the old ways ("abuse-mailbox:"
in 5 object types, IRT and remarks) are still littered throughout the
I think it is time to schedule that cleanup.
I'd like to have the "cleanup" defined and discussed before doing it.
The 'remarks' are obviously not really useful, and the abuse-c seems to
replace functionally the abuse-mailbox (except that I still miss a 'more
specific' abuse-c). The IRT objects are different though, and have
features that the abuse-c lacks. So unless the abuse-c is able to
replace the IRT, I'd object to deleting those.
(to be specific: I'd hate to lose the signature and encryption fields -
I think it was a mistake not to add those to the abuse-c from the start)