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

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

Leo Vegoda leo.vegoda at
Thu Jun 17 02:30:50 UTC 2010

On Jun 16, 2010, at 7:20 PM, Tobias Knecht wrote:

>>> Okay look at it that way. If AfriNIC would offer a service, where
>>> I could put in a ip address and get back the abuse contact e-mail
>>> address, why should I start doing painful and really ugly whois
>>> queries to send this stuff to more than the mentioned receiver?
>> I think this idea has potential and is worth exploring further. It is
>> quite different from the current proposal, though.
> That would be the next step after having the dedicated abuse contact
> information. ;-)

To be clear, the IRT object is much more than just where to e-mail your abuse report. Here is the template:

irt:            [mandatory]  [single]     [primary/look-up key]
address:        [mandatory]  [multiple]   [ ]
phone:          [optional]   [multiple]   [ ]
fax-no:         [optional]   [multiple]   [ ]
e-mail:         [mandatory]  [multiple]   [lookup key]
abuse-mailbox:  [optional]   [multiple]   [inverse key]
signature:      [optional]   [multiple]   [ ]
encryption:     [optional]   [multiple]   [ ]
org:            [optional]   [multiple]   [inverse key]
admin-c:        [mandatory]  [multiple]   [inverse key]
tech-c:         [mandatory]  [multiple]   [inverse key]
auth:           [mandatory]  [multiple]   [inverse key]
remarks:        [optional]   [multiple]   [ ]
irt-nfy:        [optional]   [multiple]   [inverse key]
notify:         [optional]   [multiple]   [inverse key]
mnt-by:         [mandatory]  [multiple]   [inverse key]
changed:        [mandatory]  [multiple]   [ ]
source:         [mandatory]  [single]     [ ]

Because an IRT object has so much extra information in it it needs to be carefully parsed before the information can be used. Your new proposal for a far simpler protocol would not require that extra data and so would not require an IRT object. For instance:

RESPONSE: abuse at

You don't need to extract the e-mail address from the object in the response. Instead, you just make sure that it is a valid address. Far simpler.

I suspect the problem here is not the complexity of the protocol but in getting agreement from all the relevant IRs to implement it.


Leo Vegoda

More information about the RPD mailing list