[db-wg] Proposal: Abuse-C as a Reference
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] Proposal: Abuse-C as a Reference
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] Proposal: Abuse-C as a Reference
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Ulrich Kiermayr
ulrich.kiermayr at univie.ac.at
Fri May 7 15:05:12 CEST 2004
Hi, >>This abuse-c inherits all the features of irt as well ... > Except that crypto is optional. Fair enough. Intentionally here (since it modifies existing object tempates - using mandatory here is not a good itea(tm)) >>... resulting in just one object for this area > > I suggest we keep IRT for the purpose for which it was built, > and make no changes to it (so it will be different from the role > or person used we make available for abuse). > > This might actually encourage the use of IRT objects, since it > reduces the risk that CSIRTs will get abuse reports they mostly > don't want. > And IRTs may then be useful, so I don't support removing them. Fair enough as well. (though I'd like to think about that a little more) > I think the 1-1 mapping is unnecessary; auto-copying is still > possible. You basically get that basically for free: All the attributes I added to person/role i conscider useful independently of this topic. > Can you confirm that the abuse-c: attribute can also refer to an > IRT object for people who want to do it that way? This goes against how i understand the database's logic. so No. The issue here is what I tried to point out before lunch: the mindset of irt being a maintainer is flawed. anf for that reason I originally proposed this migration irt-> person/role (wether te attribute is called abuse-c, security-c, irt-c, or whatever is a matter of taste) > Do we need a dedicated attribute in role and person? > abuse-mail: [optional] [multiple] [ ] This is the part that I was not sure of. > (or the name could be 'abuse-mailbox' as in Ulrich's example) > Does the attribute need to be a lookup key like e-mail? > (again as in the example) probably yes. > Should we make the abuse-mail attribute mandatory for the object > types concerned? No - for the same reasons as with encryption above and: > But that might force us to use a new object type :-( >>Return abuse-c by default as well > The thing to return is not the name of the abuse-c reference; > it's the abuse-mail attribute of the object referred to. > Perhaps that's what you meant anyway? This depends. Id. Like this discussed in the broader-sense of what the Database returns how. Would for example a comment above the Returned objects be useful: % This is the RIPE Whois server. % The objects are in RPSL format. % % Rights restricted by copyright. % See http://www.ripe.net/ripencc/pub-services/db/copyright.html inetnum: 131.130.7.32 - 131.130.7.47 mnt-irt: IRT-UK org: ORG-UK1-RIPE netname: UK-V4 descr: LAN Ulrich Kiermayr country: AT admin-c: UK6107-RIPE tech-c: UK3 abuse-c: UK3 mnt-by: AS760-MNT mnt-by: UK-MNT status: ASSIGNED PA changed: ulrich.kiermayr at univie.ac.at 20020822 changed: uk at uk.atat.at 20040128 source: RIPE % % Administrative Contact: person: Ulrich Kiermayr address: Vienna University address: Computer Center address: Universitaetsstrasse 7 address: A-1010 Vienna address: Austria phone: +43 1 4277 14104 fax-no: +43 1 4277 9140 e-mail: Ulrich.Kiermayr at UniVie.ac.at nic-hdl: UK6107-RIPE remarks: GPG-Key: PGPKEY-A8D764D8 mnt-by: ACONET-LIR-MNT changed: panigl at cc.univie.ac.at 20010629 changed: kiermayr at cc.univie.ac.at 20020603 changed: ulrich.kiermayr at univie.ac.at 20020805 source: RIPE % % Technical and Abuse Contact: person: Ulrich Kiermayr address: Lacknergasse 71/23 address: A-1180 Wien address: AT phone: +43 1 5248266 phone: +43 664 8174818 e-mail: Ulrich.Kiermayr at UniVie.ac.at nic-hdl: UK3 remarks: GPG-Key: PGPKEY-A8D764D8 mnt-by: UK-MNT notify: Ulrich.Kiermayr at UniVie.ac.at changed: Ulrich.Kiermayr at UniVie.ac.at 20020723 source: RIPE In the classical whois inteface i se broblems modifing information presented. i.e. you should be able to put into the machinary exactly what the DB gave you in the query. (Otherwise tools migt break). But I see no problen in structuring this by means of comments (which are present on top anyway with the well denoted %-sign). or does RPSL prohibit this? >>Return abuse-c by default as well >>(or include default -c i.e. return abuse-c from the least specific >>inetnum containing the ip in question). wich in the above Idea means: % % Closest Match Abuse Contact: ..... > Not quite, surely. We want to provide one user population with > exactly one e-mail address and not too much else; so somehow we > have to walk the database for them and not put the burden on > them or their client software. I do not believe we can expect > tool writers (eg SpamCop, geektools) to do that for us; I do not > believe we can deploy a different whois client. We might get > away with publishing a different server location > (whois-for-the-masses.ripe.net? abuse.ripe.net?); > or with putting this behaviour on whois.ripe.net and moving > the present behaviour to a new address. more of the first (because of what I stated above). > But don't we want to present the mail address derived from > the _most_ specific inetnum (rather than the least)? Sorry this was a typo. substitute least by most in my statement. >>Change the -c flag to use abuse-c instead of mnt-irt. Depends. -c is handy for both things i think. lG uk -- Ulrich Kiermayr Zentraler Informatikdienst der Universitaet Wien Network - Security - ACOnet-CERT Universitaetsstrasse 7, 1010 Wien, AT eMail: ulrich.kiermayr at univie.ac.at Tel: (+43 1) 4277 / 14104 PGP Key-ID: 0xA8D764D8 Fax: (+43 1) 4277 / 9140
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] Proposal: Abuse-C as a Reference
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] Proposal: Abuse-C as a Reference
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]