[db-wg] Suggestions to improve the IRT object
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] Suggestions to improve the IRT object
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] RIPE53 DB-WG Draft Agenda V2
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet
Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at
Fri Sep 15 08:55:08 CEST 2006
Dear Philippe, thank you very much for these suggestions. At first glance they do make a lot of sense! I'll also put this topic onto the draft agenda for the next WG Meeting. In the meantime discussion on the mailing list is encouraged. Please! I took the liberty to forward these suggestions to the list for the European security and incident response teams, too, asking for feedback on *this* list. Wilfried. Philippe Bourcier wrote: > > Hi, > > The -c flag which is going to be implemented soon for any standard IP > query to the RIPE whois is a good thing. 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... > > > Facts > ===== > > 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. > > > Proposal > ======== > > 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.) > > > 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. > > > RFD > === > What do people think about these 2 ideas ? > > > Sincerely, > Philippe Bourcier > >
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] Suggestions to improve the IRT object
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] RIPE53 DB-WG Draft Agenda V2
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]