[db-wg] Proposal to clean up historical "abuse-mailbox:" attributes

On Thu, May 07, 2015 at 07:15:41PM +0200, denis wrote:

Dear Denis and DB-WG Members

> Tools provided by the RIPE NCC to find the abuse contact for a
> resource (RIPEstat, Abuse Finder) only search for "abuse-c:" data.

Just to clarify - I'm affraid that this looks like not being correct.

First of all, this topic was discussed at RIPE69 and it was declared by
RIPE NCC Staff Member that RIPEstat is still using more sophisticated
way to look for abuse contact. Moreover, at the RIPEstat Abuse Contact
Finder webpage (https://stat.ripe.net/specials/abuse) there is still
present link to RIPE Labs article describing how this tool works
(https://labs.ripe.net/Members/cteusche/finding-anti-abuse-contact-information-with-ripestat).

All above are of course just kind of hints. However, one can check this
in practice, looking for Abuse Contact for 155.202.0.0/16 (being just an
example here). Both whois client and Abuse Finder says that there is no
abuse contact registered for 155.202.0.0/16, whereas RIPEstat reports
abuse at produban.com with 4/5 quality rating as an Abuse Contact.

This looks like those tools are based on different alghoritms and
RIPEstat doesn't _only_ search for "abuse-c" data.

> A cleanup was proposed in the impact analysis for ripe-563
> https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2011-06
> " In order to clean up existing data, the RIPE NCC will notify the
> users and convert "abuse-mailbox:" attributes into "remarks:" in any
> object other than role objects."

> As it is now a few years since this was discussed and agreed I think
> it wise to propose the cleanup again and reaffirm this is the way to
> go.

> I therefore propose the RIPE NCC converts all "abuse-mailbox:"
> attributes into "remarks:" attributes in PERSON, MNTNER, ORGANISATION
> and IRT objects. Then deprecates this attribute from these object
> types.

Although I like this idea, I would prefer that RIPE NCC first address
the problem of missing abuse-c attributes.

> I further propose that any "abuse-mailbox:" attribute in a ROLE
> object, where the ROLE object is not referenced by any "abuse-c:"
> attribute, and has not been referenced for at least 90 days, is also
> converted into "remarks:". This will help to clean up historical
> "abuse-mailbox:" attributes that existed in ROLE objects before
> "abuse-c:" was introduced.

Is this going to be one-time action or periodic, scheduled procedure?

Best regards,
Piotr

-- 
gucio -> Piotr Strzyżewski
E-mail: Piotr.Strzyzewski at polsl.pl