On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 12:56:48PM +0000, Randy Bush wrote:
o The inetnum: and inet6num: objects are enhanced with an optional attribute "abuse-c:". The value of the attribute is a nic-handle: which must refer to an extant person: or role: object. There may be zero or more abuse-c: attributes in an inet*num: object.
I don't see any reason why abuse-c: should refer to person: or role: object. Simple email address(es) would be imho just enough...
On 29.01 14:42, Ulrich Kiermayr wrote:
From the user's viewpoint yes, from the viewpoint of having to maintain the objects, I'd prefer a reference, because if the mailbox changes, you just have to maintain 1 Object and not n (for arbitrary positive integers of n)
- if I understand correctly, this atribute is going to be added just because of those users, and because they often don't read what is there and send e-mail to whatever addresses they find, the abuse-c: should contain direct e-mail. - also, as MarcoH said, it's very easy to change remarks: to abuse-c:, while it's hard to put them all into newly created contacts. - third argument is, as many organizations do have only one IP-range, they would really find creating of new handle superflous. (well, we have 3 ranges, and I think that's very easy to put e-mail to all of them) The best would probably be, if abuse-c: would accept e-mail, or pointer to another object, so the network maintainer could decide which one to use. - Is that possible? -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. Support bacteria - they're the only culture some people have.