[AfriNIC-rpd] Staff Comments & Implementation Impact Analysis for Policy - Abuse Contact Information in the AfriNIC Service Region (AFPUB-2010-GEN-006)

[SM]

Hi Tobias,
At 16:13 17-01-11, Tobias Knecht wrote:
>I fully understand that you will have query restrictions on personal
>data and I understand that you have query restrictions at all, but there
>must be a much higher threshold for abuse contact information as for
>personal data.

I doubt that having a much higher threshold would help a well known 
antispam organization and some CSIRTs from sending their abuse 
reports to the wrong abuse contact.

>Or do you mean that such an object can only be referenced once within an
>inetnum?

Yes.

>What happens if John Doe has an object and he is admin-c of an inetnum.
>Can he add an abuse-mailbox to his object an be admin-c and abuse-c in
>the same inetnum?
>
>What happens if John Does object has an abuse-mailbox attribute and
>Charly Chaplins object has an abuse-mailbox attribute as well. Can John
>Doe be the admin-c and Charly Chaplin be the abuse-c in the same
>inetnum? Showing 2 different abuse-mailbox attributes while quering one
>an the same inetnum?

As AfriNIC is responsible for the implementation, it might be able to 
provide you with an answer to the above questions.

>Abuse contact information are messed up in the RIPE database. There are
>too much possibilities (IRT, abuse-mailbox within person, role, irt and
>org objects, remark fields, ...). Those possibilities can not be parsed
>in an easy way. There is no way to check data accuracy.

Does that mean the information in the Abuse Finder Database can be inaccurate?

Regards,
-sm