[anti-abuse-wg] 2011-06 New Policy Proposal (Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE NCC Database)
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2011-06 New Policy Proposal (Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE NCC Database)
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2011-06 New Policy Proposal (Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE NCC Database)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Adrian
ripe-wg-antiabuse at kyubu.de
Thu Nov 24 14:54:40 CET 2011
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 02:30:49PM +0100, Tobias Knecht wrote: hi, > You are quite right. At the moment, but few years ago, the IRT object > was not intended for abuse departments handling outbound abuse. IRT was > originally intended for certs exchange information about security > issues. Yet, a _single_ point of contact (mail, fax, phone, you name it) should is provided. The way abuse-related information is processed internally (outbound abuse communication vs. information sharing between teams) in institutions cannot (and won't) be solved in whois. > And that is exactly what the IRT should be again, with all the > security measures, that were mandatory at the very beginning and got > canceled over time. I am surprised, you have any examples for IRT objects were these measures were dropped? Cheers, Adrian
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2011-06 New Policy Proposal (Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE NCC Database)
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] 2011-06 New Policy Proposal (Abuse Contact Management in the RIPE NCC Database)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]