Hello all, It seems that some of our friends are thinking that admin-c should or must know about technical aspects. If it is the case, why should we have tech-c? Kind Regards, Saeed.
No, I don't think so Saeed. But from the look of it, I think that most would like to remove the admin-c altogether and remain with tech-c only. I would suggest leaving the field admin-c optional. Regards, Duncan
Hello all, It seems that some of our friends are thinking that admin-c should or must know about technical aspects. If it is the case, why should we have tech-c? Kind Regards, Saeed.
No, I don't think so Saeed.
But from the look of it, I think that most would like to remove the admin-c altogether and remain with tech-c only. I would suggest leaving the field admin-c optional.
I thought the reason was that the admin contact needed to be physically located at the site where the IP's are in use, whereas the tech contact could be remote, but I stand to be corrected! Dave
Hello all, It seems that some of our friends are thinking that admin-c should or must know about technical aspects. If it is the case, why should we have tech-c?
----------- Dave Mullender Hiway Communications Ltd Tel: 01635 573300 Fax: 01635 573329
I think, that admin-c it is the man carrying out a management tech-c. It necessarily should understand thoroughly technical questions, but it should be. Duncan Vella wrote:
No, I don't think so Saeed.
But from the look of it, I think that most would like to remove the admin-c altogether and remain with tech-c only. I would suggest leaving the field admin-c optional.
Regards, Duncan
Hello all, It seems that some of our friends are thinking that admin-c should or must know about technical aspects. If it is the case, why should we have tech-c? Kind Regards, Saeed.
-- SY, Lebedev Andrew BS ISP
participants (4)
-
Dave Mullender -
dvella＠melitacable.com -
Lebedev Andrew -
SAEED KHADEMI