Hi Frank, Frank wrote:
Leo Vegoda wrote:
Marco Schmidt wrote:
[...]
It is disappointing that this new proposal is still focused on a one-time process of adding additional contact information and does not address ongoing management of the published information. Until there is a policy requiring contact information to be regularly maintained, proposal 2011-06 is of limited value.
Not at all, its good to seperate definitions and other procedures like management or validation of abuse contacts, if you remember how hard it is to achive consensus.
Lets starts simple and lets add other parts later.
I will be happy to prepare a validation draft, if the community wants it.
My issue is mainly with the way the proposals are ordered. Creating new requirements for types of contact data to be published before agreeing on a contact data management policy risks creating a situation where a new layer of contact information of questionable quality is added as a one-time only event. Unless you have a pre-existing contact data management policy you are just making the problem bigger and putting off the day when the mess has to be cleared up. Agreeing a way to manage contact data should be a prerequisite to the creation of new contact types. Regards, Leo Vegoda