-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 | From: Thor Kottelin <thor@anta.net> | So, we already have the irt object and the trouble attribute. | Additionally, | abuse is often reported based on admin-c, tech-c, changed, remarks and | $DEITY knows what. Please let's not add to the confusion by creating | even more attribute or object types. There is a clear problem with what we have now, whether techncially or simply awareness, as it is clear that lots and lots of inet[6]num objects have remarks identifying abuse contacts in a variety of formats. There is a need for people to identify abuse contacts associated with an IP[6]. "trouble" does not help as it is also free format and so not much better than remarks. "irt" may be the answer, and I am creating one for our use at present (still not had a reply - why is it a manual process?). It may be over complex. It is not well publicised to those that need to know. Even those that know of it (and I had seen it) do not realise it is the way to put an abuse contact on an inetnum (hence my original question). FYI, our abuse report scripts now look for a mnt-irt field and if not found go for the admin-c field. They used to just go for the admin field. However, I do think something has to be done as it is a nonsense the way it is now. - -- Rev Adrian Kennard -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2-rc1-SuSE (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFAAufMHBb4e52L0Y0RAoHlAJ0ZLrp5QiftL7iWEqpcUxVUxZjLSgCcC8Vo j86xkD4uQ0dcTkzcWOOjtaU= =ykiB -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----