[db-wg] Should the "e-mail" attribute be mandatory for the "person" object?

> [...] "inetnum" objects with no valid email address cause grief.  [...]

> I would therefore like to suggest making the "e-mail" attribute
> mandatory for the "person" object.  If this isn't acceptable, then
> maybe at least one of the "person" or "role" objects referred to by
> an "inetnum" object should carry an "e-mail" attribute.

> Your comments, please.

For person objects, I see no particular reason to have email addresses.
(While I see little use for a person object without one, I don't know
what uses about which I know nothing person objects may be put to.)

But I strongly believe that every inetnum _needs_ an email address, one
which reaches a human with authority to deal with abuse issues relating
to that netblock.

Unfortunately, this is unlikely to happen.  RIPE's own blocks fail the
test; in the few cases where I've had to escalate all the way to them,
(usually because a directly-allocated block has contact email addresses
that bounce), RIPE has flatly refused to do any of

	- Take the abuse report and see to it that the abuse stops
	- Ensure that the netblock's contact address(es) is(are)
	   corrected
	- Deallocate the address space

With RIPE itself refusing to take ultimate responsibility for what's
done with its address space, why should anyone else?

/~\ The ASCII				der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML	       mouse at rodents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B