Hi Shane,
On of the problems that was identified when the irt object type was defined is that there are a lot of meanings of "incident" that the "irt" could be responding to. The same applies to an "abuse-c:" attribute. Does abuse mean spam? DoS? Illegally trading movies? E-mailed viruses? Pornography? Gambling? Hijacking address space?
I believe "abuse-address" in regards to IP addresses simply means the entity to contact if you feel the user of a specific IP addresses has acted inappropriately, this is of course relative and also has to do with the law in the country where the IP address is used. The point is that any Internet user can access a public available database and find the entity in charge of the IP address - if communication between the entity in charge and the Internet user reporting the abuse concludes no law has been broken in the country where the IP address is operated then this doesn't have much to do with the database telling which entity is in charge of the IP address.
Do you have different desks for these different types of abuses? If so, does it make sense to have different contacts for them? (History shows this doesn't matter too much - as users tend to send to every e-mail they can find. But in the future, it would make modifying output of tools to only display relevant information easier.)
If you have to create categories for abuse, both all LIRs and all Internet users has to agree on the definitions and I don't think that's very realistic. Med venlig hilsen/Best regards Christian Rasmussen Hosting manager, jay.net a/s Smedeland 32, 2600 Glostrup, Denmark Email: noc@jay.net Personal email: chr@corp.jay.net Tlf./Phone: +45 3336 6300, Fax: +45 3336 6301 Produkter / Products: http://hosting.jay.net