You are here: Home > Participate > Join a Discussion > Mailman Archives

[anti-spam-wg] Fwd: IRT abuse-mailbox things...


A few months ago I tried to start a thread on db-wg about the IRT object use and ease of deployment and had not much success... so I hope it will get more success here.
1 - IRT object

The -c flag which is going to be implemented soon for any standard IP query to the RIPE whois is a good thing.
(Well it seems this didn't happen yet...)

But since most IRT objects returned don't have an abuse-mailbox field, the result is pretty useless (no e-mail will be returned). Developers will keep using -B in their tools so that they can send their abuse reports somewhere...
The e-mail field of an IRT object is hidden until you use the -B flag.
Most IRT objects have been created without an abuse-mailbox field.
For the IRT object, the e-mail field is mandatory, but the abuse-mailbox is optional.
The e-mail field of an IRT object is by definition an abuse-mailbox.

One of the easiest way to make the -c flag really useful without -B is to have all IRT objects return an abuse-mailbox. Thus, the abuse-mailbox field should be mandatory and for all IRT objects which don't have one, the e-mail field should be copied to it.
(To be logical, the e-mail attribute should be set to optional.)

2 - Easy deployment of IRT object / abuse-mailbox

More Thoughts
Another issue is to deploy the IRT object (or even the abuse-mailbox...) on a huge number of inetnum's. If we wait for people to modify all their inetnum objects so that they have an abuse-mailbox or irt-mnt attribute, it will take ages. A standard IP query to the RIPE whois now gives one "origin" attribute (or more).
Maybe the mnt-irt of that aut-num could be displayed in the default output...
A company not owning the AS announcing their prefix, and willing to use its own IRT object (or abuse-mailbox) could use the mnt-irt in their inetnum('s) to specify a "more specific" one.


Philippe Bourcier