0 *H÷ 01 0 +0 *H÷ $ ¬Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, I've just got a few things to add :) ALL of our customers upto date have "managed services" from us. eg. we supply them an Internet Connection, a Managed router & deal with all their "Internet Problems". Who would be better to become the tech-c & admin-c for them? us perhaps? because we support it - ahh but currently we're not on their site. Also - a few of the customers have "I.T. Support Contracts" - eg. we deal with *all* their "Technical Requirements" eg. If *anything* goes wrong - they call *us*. In the case of those few customers, they have NO technical staff ( or even half technical ) on-site at all. Darren Smith JPCiNET
-----Original Message----- From: owner-local-ir@ripe.net [mailto:owner-local-ir@ripe.net]On Behalf Of Paula Caslav Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 1999 10:35 AM To: lir-wg@ripe.net Cc: local-ir@ripe.net Subject: admin-c in inetnum
Dear Registries,
Please note that this message is send to both the lir-wg and the local-ir mailing lists. We would like all discussion to take place on the lir-wg mailing list only.
We are re-evaluating the usage of the admin-c field in the inetnum database object.
This is what ripe-185 currently says about the admin-c field:
The administrative person specified in the admin-c field must be physically located at the site of the network. The person does not have to have technical knowledge of the network. The technical person specified in the tech-c field may be a network support person located on site, but could also be a consultant that maintains the network for the organisation. In both cases, more than one person can be specified.
We are wondering how the admin-c field is used in practice, and whether it is really necessary for the administrative contact to be on-site. Usually when something goes wrong with a network, people are meant to try the technical contact to get things fixed. If that person cannot be reached, however, the administrative contact should be somebody responsible for the network who can in an emergency find someone who can take care of the problems. The administrative person does not have to have technical knowledge of the network, but should know who to contact in case of problems. For this purpose it is not strictly necessary for the administrative contact to be on-site. We therefore propose a change to the policy- that the administrative contact should be somebody who is responsible for the network, but does not necessarily need to be on-site.
Please let us know your thoughts on this, we would especially like to hear how these fields are used in real-life. Have you ever had the need to contact the admin-c? Is it usefull for that person to be on-site or not?
Kind regards,
Paula Caslav RIPE NCC
&0Ž0 ü|0 *H÷ 0¹1 0 UZA10U Western Cape10U Durbanville10U Thawte Consulting1)0'U Thawte PF RSA IK 1998.9.16 17:551604U-Thawte Personal Freemail RSA Issuer 1998.9.160 990611111521Z 000610111521Z0A1 0 UThawte Freemail Member1 0 *H÷ darren@jpci.net00 *H÷ 0äe0[=1d};/t ®/Úèýæc#)VrË $ARµ¯œwµIß[<²H$k±,Ãö xŒ V<Þ!àžª/ŽèܬÚN5ûYe}îÛK¯Õ"6ÅX±ì¢¿w ÛxÚ~ÿœþ`uÁGn(#<U£A0?0U ÿ 0 U ÿ00 U #0þ>`k°Ø3ÆÊÆ X°q8µà0 *H÷ AWË lCJ ŒZ+ G1p Kbxq$±ô¹)#ïòÿ©ŠÄrøc¥'¹ »¬\ß<E.îR ÐÁÞª©ÝÜ/Ãk<1Wj',×ü¡Êñ0*=46ç£4Éõ<S{WcÿÙª ZîK©A_${œïA0-0 0 *H÷ 0Ñ1 0 UZA10U Western Cape10U Cape Town10U Thawte Consulting1(0&U Certification Services Division1$0"UThawte Personal Freemail CA1+0) *H÷ personal-freemail@thawte.com0 960101000000Z 201231235959Z0Ñ1 0 UZA10U Western Cape10U Cape Town10U Thawte Consulting1(0&U Certification Services Division1$0"UThawte Personal Freemail CA1+0) *H÷ personal-freemail@thawte.com00 *H÷ 0Ôi×Ô°d[qéGØ Q¶êr°^}- {ß %u(t:B,c'{Kï~ ê£Ý¹ÎdÂnD¬|æèMq @8Š£xöù^êÀ^vëÙ£]nz| ¥KU)&Õj»8$jDZڣýyÛåZÄ ¹£00U ÿ0ÿ0 *H÷ Çì~Nøõ¥gb*€ðM`Ðo`Xa¬&»R5\Ï0ûšJ bB#ôºd¬G)ß^Òl`q\¢¬ÜyãçnG µ (èäýôŠÙ|±øÜ_#& sÐÞC©%òæ/ÊþŠ«u ÝQkäøÑÎw¢090¢ 0 *H÷ 0Ñ1 0 UZA10U Western Cape10U Cape Town10U Thawte Consulting1(0&U Certification Services Division1$0"UThawte Personal Freemail CA1+0) *H÷ personal-freemail@thawte.com0 980916175534Z 000915175534Z0¹1 0 UZA10U Western Cape10U Durbanville10U Thawte Consulting1)0'U Thawte PF RSA IK 1998.9.16 17:551604U-Thawte Personal Freemail RSA Issuer 1998.9.1600 *H÷ 0Ä¥åÔÔÐ_î!}$¿«k ë kÐ$ îh²¹,Oég ¡ùCA#¹0ªv»óçýÀµ1öŠP&Tò(ë€ °âžÁ2Ð< lOä5Oðv¿OE`óüŽÐɺRê*56<<ä5/£7050U ÿ0ÿ0 U #0rIÂs4ÆUô vr~wôçƲ0 *H÷ ,Ç C>îi\©døÀ+ËP×@ºŠv<@ÜUÁáUy« )ŠÕ áW(>ù»Õß Xª[-3äÝX5vr)œBôZ w_'Û-NÒV»ÞÛ eÞÝSŸŸükÃ"z+aœÂ^zZ1Ü0Ø0Á0¹1 0 UZA10U Western Cape10U Durbanville10U Thawte Consulting1)0'U Thawte PF RSA IK 1998.9.16 17:551604U-Thawte Personal Freemail RSA Issuer 1998.9.16ü|0 + p0 *H÷ 1 *H÷ 0 *H÷ 1 990616083200Z0# *H÷ 1Fj]6N ®ÓÙA ·ZÎÒº0< *H÷ 1/0-0+0 *H÷ (0+0 *H÷ 0Ò +71Ä0Á0¹1 0 UZA10U Western Cape10U Durbanville10U Thawte Consulting1)0'U Thawte PF RSA IK 1998.9.16 17:551604U-Thawte Personal Freemail RSA Issuer 1998.9.16ü|0 *H÷ yÛ48Å¡æÑ UZ°\mV#êüYv³ž°Aw ÕV ãÀ)cEaeÊ{5Z0ý=üN ŸªvÀŒSjÀ-ÓxG G²*ç¢Nðß/³bÊ}Ñ£ `ls Lx} Æ å_þvªØ/Õ¬A`]KÏùÅs