Hi Kaveh, et.al, I'm trying to figure out what I need to do to benefit from the abuse-c initiative with minimal impact to our documentation and processes. On 19.11.2012 10:38 AM, Kaveh Ranjbar wrote:
Yes, in the data entry side a little bit more effort is required, but as we have mentioned at (https://labs.ripe.net/Members/kranjbar/implementation-details-of-policy-2011...), there are two main reasons for that:
a) This models the reality, in almost every case we know of, abuse handling is a role within an organisation. On he other hand attaching an email address to a resource is creating an arbitrary link.
b) Operationally it is a lot more feasible for our members and users to enter data and more importantly to maintain this data over time if it is centralised in an entity modelled after their real work setup.
While rolling out IPv6 we (must) document the assignments. This can (as far as I known) either be done by a covering inet6num object with an "assignment-size" and an internal documentation or by having an inet6num object for every assignment. With the later we can have an "abuse-mailbox" in a role object linking to "tech-c" (and "admin-c") of the inet6num object. So this is what we are doing today (create a role-object with abuse-mailbox etc. per role/customer/participant and link to it from admin-c and tech-c in the inet[6]num objects). With this new schema we need to create an additional organisation object just to link from the inet[6]num object (through "org" and the organisation object) to the (already existing) role object. In the additional organisation object we copy the address and e-mail information from the role object, because these two fields are mandatory in both objects. So we need to keep track of this information in two objects. Please see an example scheme here with the mandatory fields: inet6num: 2001:db8:1337::/48 ~~~~~~~~~ netname: blubb-net1 descr: network of blubb country: DE admin-c: >--------------------+ tech-c: >--------------------+ status: ASSIGNED | mnt-by, changed, source: ... | (org): >------------------+ | | | | | organisation: ORG-BLUBB-RIPE <---+ | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | abuse-c: >------------------+ | org-name: blubb | | org-type: OTHER | | address: <copy from | | e-mail: role object> | | mnt-ref: ... | | mnt-by, changed, source: ... | | | | | | role: blubb | | ~~~~~ | | address: fantasialand | | nic-hdl: blubb-RIPE <------+-+ e-mail: role-email@example.com admin-c: >-----------------------> person: tech-c: >-----------------------> person(s): mnt-by, changed, source: ... abuse-mailbox: abuse@example.com Did I miss something? Can I do this easier? Or is it mandatory/best practice to create an organisation object for each customer/party anyway ? If not, I would be happy to link directly from an "abuse-c" in the inet[6]num object to the role account (in parallel to tech-c and admin-c). Many thanks for help, Tim