[ARIN-consult] [E] Re: Consultation on Orphaned Organization (Org) and Point of Contact (POC) Records

[Joe Provo]

[personal hat on]

On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 07:37:54AM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
[snip]
> It might be nice if it was sufficient to simply validate the POC
> ala current POC validation procedure rather than requiring some
> form of change, but if there???s some reason not to permit that,
> I???m not strongly tied to the idea.

Allowing POC validation to de-orphan (until the next iteration)
nicely covers a number of smaller edge cases previously raised.
I think that's a big win for aliveness detection.

Offhand, I'd lean to qtrly rather than 60 days as even the
larger iceberg orgs tend to be able to address things on that
timescale. Not super wedded to that detail.

JC previously wrote:
> Of the 454,090 Org IDs that currently have one and only one 
> reassignment, 81,480 (18%) are duplicates (i.e. share the exact 
> same organization name with another of the 454,090). 
> While there may be differences in street address, contacts, etc, 
> this suggests an opportunity on the part of ISPs to examine their 
> SWIP publication practices and cut down on duplicate records, 
> which in turn reduces orphaned records.

I would refer back to the entire discussion around "POC validation 
on insert/creation" related to larger entities with poor practices.
As that's only 18% of the current problem, perhaps a symmetrical
process of "POC validation at time of orphaning" would be desirable
*after* this larger garbage collection process had run its course?
It seems to me that keeping the data hygiene part of the transaction
would increase the likelihood of success (attention is currently 
here) else we'll be permanently relying upon garbage collection 
sweeps and the possibility of having to re-engage well after 
transactions have been completed and forgotten.

Cheers!

Joe

-- 
Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header.
Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling