Hi, On Mon, 26 May 2025 at 00:54, Sasha Romijn via db-wg <db-wg@ripe.net> wrote: [...]
Therefore, I feel we should keep e-mail mandatory. It is widely established and used, and not (or at least limited) tied to complex T&C. I know it's not everyone's favorite method, but to me it seems like the one we can all tolerate.
One reason I left it as optional in the text is some pushback I had when drafting it from people who told me that they almost never used e-mail any more. I'm not convinced that e-mail is as common as many would like. Nonetheless, there's no need to run. A walking pace is fine. I have no objection to e-mail being retained as mandatory.
On 26 May 2025, at 00:49, Leo Vegoda <leo@vegoda.org> wrote:
This proposal is limited to admin-c and tech-c contact types.
Are you intentionally leaving out zone-c and abuse-c, which, if I'm not mistaken, are also references to role or person objects? I understand the abuse-mailbox attribute being a special additional requirement, but reading your proposal literally, we would still require a postal address when a role is used as abuse-c and tech-c, but not when it's only used for tech-c.
I don't know whether part of this is oversight or intent, but I think the NWI should at least explicitly mention zone-c/abuse-c.
My thought was to work in Database WG to establish the capability. Then, if the people in the DNS and Security WGs want to take advantage of it they can do so. Thanks, Leo