Hi, On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 11:40:25PM +0100, Tobias Knecht wrote: > On another note I find it slightly strange, that in almost every threat > about abuse-c the topic of data accuracy is brought up, but policy > proposals like the abuse-c for legacy space has been withdrawn due lack of > consensus.
This is not a contradiction.
Forcing legacy holders to add "something" to the database is not magically
going to create "good quality data" for that something.
As is the mandatory abuse-c today - it created "something" (so we can now
tout how wonderfully complete our database is), but given that it was
forced upon non-caring people, the *quality* of the recorded abuse-c:
values is not necessarily better than it would have been for "if you care,
please register an abuse-c:".
For our data, the data quality is less good than before, as I find it far
too annoying to register abuse-c: for customer networks where the abuse
mails *could* be going directly (our parent abuse-c: points to our
abuse handling team, so mails are going to be handled, but might take
longer to reach the customer).
For many PI holders I have seen auto-generated abuse-c: ("forced!"), which
bascically duplicates the normal contact info. Yay.
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
