[AfriNIC-rpd] Re: Return of Policy Proposal RPD Mailinglist: Abuse Contact Information in the AfriNIC Service Region

[Owen DeLong]

I think it's a bad idea.  It's way more complication (from the ISP/end user
perspective) than is required.  In short, this is using a sledge hammer to
swat at mosquitos.

As in real life, this rarely kills the mosquito, but, often leaves a great many
holes in walls.

By making this mandatory, you will increase the cruft-level in the database
rather than reduce it. By requiring an entire additional object which contains
a significant amount of duplicated data from other objects, you will create
a data-integrity and maintenance problem. Even people that want to
comply and do the "right thing" will likely lose track of the association of
the various objects and the need to constantly update multiple objects.

That's why it's better to maintain contacts in "Contact" objects and
have "Organization" objects with contact fields that point to "Contact"
objects. Resource objects should have contact fields which either
inherit from the Organization object (default) or can have their own
override pointers to "Contact" objects.

I am not a stakeholder in this region, so, you are welcome to take or leave
my advice. However, it is my not so humble opinion that down this road
lies madness.

Owen

I will now attempt to return to lurker mode.

On Jul 6, 2010, at 4:51 AM, Tobias Knecht wrote:

> Hello again,
> 
>>> Are there any questions about the intent of this policy proposal?
>> 
>> I am curious as to why you are still pushing this obviously unwanted
>> idea?  How does this help your working model/biz model?
> 
> Because it is needed! And it is not changing our working model/biz model
> in either way. It is helping the idea of "Global Reporting" and it's
> helping the idea of collaboration between ISPs and network owners.
> 
> I'm pushing this idea, because I'm certain about it. I have seen that
> collaboration works, that Global Reporting works, that publishing the
> correct abuse handling contacts and handling the incoming abuse
> complaints helps network owners to clean up their network.
> 
> In addition I have not heard any arguments that told me it is a bad
> idea, quite the contrary. And the argument we have done it that way for
> the last 15 years is not an argument, it's an excuse for doing nothing.
> 
> So I'm absolutely happy to hear your arguments about this proposal and
> discuss with you and any other person why it is important to implement
> this proposal.
> 
>> I still think you are ignoring the realities of object creation in the
>> AfriNIC region (we don't do it for the most part, even when we
>> should).
> 
> Just because it is like it is at the moment does first of all not imply
> that it is good. And in addition it does not imply that it has to be
> that way in future.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Tobias
> 
> -- 
> abusix.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd