[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2021-7: Make Abuse Contact Useful

[Scott Leibrand]

On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 10:27 AM Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com> wrote:

> “I would support the addition of a URL option, without the elimination of
> the Abuse POC at this time.”
>
>
>
> Me too. +1
>

+1

Backwards compatibility is important here. If we want to add URL
capabilities, there's no reason it can't be a new field.

Opposed as written.

-Scott


>
>
> *From:* ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net> *On Behalf Of *David
> Farmer via ARIN-PPML
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 27, 2021 12:51 PM
> *To:* William Herrin <bill at herrin.us>
> *Cc:* arin-ppml at arin.net
> *Subject:* Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2021-7: Make Abuse Contact
> Useful
>
>
>
> And "tel:123-456-7890 <123-456-7890>" is a URL for a phone number.
> However, that means to replace the current POC info you need at least two
> URLs and probably more if you want to support a web form and possibly an
> API option. But I don't believe a single URL is a viable solution.
>
>
>
> But then, with multiple URLs there becomes a question of order of
> preference. Which does the entity providing the URLs prefer and in what
> order? Furthermore, if you provide only a Web Form or API URL, where do you
> call or email if it seems to have gone wrong?
>
>
>
> Simply changing the Abuse Contact to a URL isn't necessarily going to
> make things better, and it could make things much worse. While this could
> allow those that want to be responsive to increase their responsiveness,
> however, I fear that it also allows those that want to be unresponsive to
> obfuscate things even more than is possible today.
>
>
>
> Having staff translate the current POC data to URLs is a reasonable
> transition strategy on the data production side of things. But a flag day
> on the data consumption side, would be unacceptable, at least in my
> opinion. So, there would need to be an overlap where both the Abuse POC and
> Abuse URL Data are available, and I think we are talking about multiple
> years of overlap. Further, for at least for part of that time those that
> want to provide only an Abuse URL would still need to provide an Abuse POC.
>
>
>
> There are many users of the current Abuse POC, and an abrupt change in
> the format of this data is not acceptable in my opinion. So, while I
> support work in this area, some changes are most definitely needed, and
> long-term this seems like the right direction, nevertheless, we need to
> proceed very carefully. Therefore, without at least a more detailed and
> lengthy transition plan, I can not support any proposal that effectively
> eliminates the Abuse POC as we know it today. I would support the addition
> of a URL option, without the elimination of the Abuse POC at this time.
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 2:10 AM William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 2:59 PM John Santos <john at egh.com> wrote:
> > My domain has a valid abuse contact (me), and it's been years since I
> actually
> > received anything except spam.  (I check the spam detector output daily
> to make
> > sure it actually is spam, and it always is.  It's usually no more than a
> handful
> > of spam emails daily, probably because I never respond to it or
> originate any
> > email from the "abuse" address, so there is nothing for the spammers to
> harvest.)
> >
> > Under this new scheme, would I still be able to handle abuse the exact
> same way?
>
> Hi John,
>
> "mailto:your at address" is a valid URL, is it not?
>
>
> >> Initial implementation suggested to replace the abuse POC with a URL
> >> pointing to ARIN’s display of the same POC record which was used for
> >> abuse reporting. Should support multiple URLs so that if desired an
> >> organization can specify both “mailto:somebody at here” and
> >> “tel:1234567 <1234567>” if that’s how they actually want abuse
> reported to them.
>
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
>
>
> --
> William Herrin
> bill at herrin.us
> https://bill.herrin.us/
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> ===============================================
> David Farmer               Email:farmer at umn.edu
> Networking & Telecommunication Services
> Office of Information Technology
> University of Minnesota
> 2218 University Ave SE        Phone: 612-626-0815
> Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
> ===============================================
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20211027/74f83465/attachment.htm>