Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[AfriNIC-rpd] abuse contact information in whois database (AFPUB-2010-GEN-002)

Tobias Knecht tk at
Sun May 30 16:48:54 UTC 2010


>> Right, but the problem is, that you have again personal objects. Which
>> you wanna protect by restricting whois queries. The IRT Object should
>> not be restricted that way. So how do you wanna solve this in the whois
>> database?
> I assume that you are referring to limiting queries against the whois? I
> am unsure how creating a new object type solves that problem. Any object
> type is open to abuse and I expect all objects in the whois to be
> suitably protected against abuse.
> I also fail to see the difference between an 'irt' object and a 'role'
> object. I would appreciate if you could help me out here.

As far as I know, from APNIC and RIPE, there is no query limit for
irt-objects and definitively no query limits for abuse-mailbox
attributes within irt objects. The reason is, that irt object has
nothing to to with an personal object.

>> And why creating a new field and a complete new way if APNIC and RIPE
>> are already using or will using this way in future?
> The way that its done in the rest of the world is not AUTOMATICALLY the
> right way to do it in Africa. ;-)

I was proposing a solution that is implemented fast and does no take
month or years, because that is something that is absolutely not the
right way for nobody.

I was proposing the draft this way, because me and lots of other people
think this might the right way. So why should this not be the right way
for Africa?

So please tell what exactly feels wrong with the irt object for you.



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list