Hendrik T Voelker wrote:
On 29.01.2004 at 13:48, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
On 29.01 12:42, Niall O'Reilly wrote:
attribute "abuse-c:". The value of the attribute is a nic-handle:
I don't see any reason why abuse-c: should refer to person: or role: object. Simple email address(es) would be imho just enough...
I would say it will be even a better solution to have only the mailadress there and no person object.
As the discussion has shown, "people" do not want to dig for another object. All they want is that damn address to complain to.
Problem is imho that a simple mail-address would only scale downwards [i.e. for those with few netblocks]. From the discussion it seems that irt only scales upwards [i.e. for the ones with many netblocks who are willing to understand the system without a priori saying 'it's too complicated] Nowing that admin-c and tech-c seems to scale over the whole spectrum, it seems the most natural implementation to have abuse-c reference a (enhanced) person/role too. This is the only way that I could see that is .) Making it simple for the small database-users .) Incorporating _all_ the features of irt for those who need them [it is imho important not to have 2,3,4... pointers for the same problem-space] .) The structure would waguely look like what arin returns (for the people this would have the advantage of only haveing to understand one structure) lG uk -- Ulrich Kiermayr Zentraler Informatikdienst der Universitaet Wien Network - Security - ACOnet-CERT Universitaetsstrasse 7, 1010 Wien, AT eMail: ulrich.kiermayr@univie.ac.at Tel: (+43 1) 4277 / 14104 PGP Key-ID: 0xA8D764D8 Fax: (+43 1) 4277 / 9140