Hi All On 18/11/2015 19:31, Piotr Strzyzewski wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 05:01:30PM +0100, de Brün, Markus wrote:
Unfortunately, there are still lots of CIDRs for which the RIPE DB does not return a dedicated abuse contact. In some cases, you can find an appropriate contact in the "remarks" or other records - which is difficult to parse automatically. In other cases there is no contact information at all.
And this is mostly the case of legacy resources. Hope we will deal with that.
Yes that is correct but there was also a problem with setting up the "abuse-c:" when new LIRs were registered which persisted long after the project for ensuring all resources issued by the RIPE NCC had an "abuse-c:". I believe this problem has since been resolved but there are still some resources that do not yet have an "abuse-c:" because of this. Some catching up and enforcing needs to be done.
Section 6.6.1 of this document says that "it [is] mandatory for every resource object (inetnum, inet6num and aut-num) to have a dedicated abuse contact."
<nitpicking> ripe-563 states that "every direct allocated inetnum and inet6num needs to have an ???abuse-c:???", which is different from "every" as is the quote above. </nitpicking>
I'm not sure what you are trying to say. RIPE-563 also states the same about aut-nums. And I'm pretty much sure that word "every" used in section 6.6.1 of the document mentioned above is used properly due to the hierarchical nature of IP address objects.
Again Piotr is correct. I think it is a question of how you interpret the word "have". Subject to above all resources must 'have' an "abuse-c:". When this was implemented it was decided not to make the reference directly from each resource object. There are over 3 million INETNUM objects which, through their hierarchical nature, reference tens of thousands of ORGANISATION objects. So rather than replicate the same information across so many objects it was decided to put the reference in the ORGANISATION object and inherit it in the resources. It was an example of how an organisation centric data model and the use of inheritance could dramatically reduce the amount of repetitive data in the database and make the whole system simpler and easier to manage. cheers denis
In fact, afaik you cannot add an abuse-c record to an inetnum object at all,
Not directly, but indirectly through organisation objects it is possible for any single inetnum object.
can you? abuse-c records are usually added to higher level objects like LIR ORG and then inherited by the lower level inetnum objects. If you want to set a dedicated abuse-contact for an inetnum, you need to add a reference to an ORG object with the corresponding abuse-c record. (see https://labs.ripe.net/Members/denis/creating-and-finding-abuse-contacts-in-t...)
This works the same way for allocations and assignments (and legacy as well).
Piotr