2 questions

[ginny listman]

Okay..

>From what people are saying, I have come up with the following POC Types:

Private (not displayed in whois): Billing, Membership and Administrative
Public (displayed in whois): Technical, NOC and Abuse

The next question is, is there a need to ever have more than one of any
type of POC?

Ginny

On Thu, 21 Dec 2000, Sanche, Greg wrote:

> 
> I also agree and support the use of multiple POC's,
> as mentioned below and include a Billing POC.
> 
> The Abuse and NOC e-mail addresses and phone numbers should be public
> knownledge and
> the Administrator and billing contact info should be protected from the
> general public.
> 
> Greg Sanche
> AT&T Canada Corp.
> Tel:  905 361-6142  Fax:  905 361-6001
> E-Mail  :  gsanche at attcanada.com
>                Greg.Sanche at attcanada.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Darren Loher [mailto:dploher at level3.net]
> Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2000 2:07 PM
> To: David R Huberman
> Cc: ginny listman; dbwg at arin.net
> Subject: Re: 2 questions
> 
> 
> I too would like the support for multiple POC's.  Particularly
> one for Abuse and one for Security.
> 
> -Darren Loher
> Level 3 Communications
> Global Data Architecture
> 
> On Thu, Dec 21, 2000 at 12:02:24PM -0700, David R Huberman wrote:
> >  
> > > 1.  Right now a POC can have any number of phones and/or mailboxes.  Is
> > > this necessary?  Can we delete all but one commercial phone, and all but
> > > one primary mailbox?  Do we need to keep fax number?
> > 
> > * The fax number doesn't seem particularly relevant in most cases, no.
> > 
> > * If you want to only allow one commercial phone number and one e-mail
> >   box, how about enhancing the database to allow multiple POC listings
> >   on objects, ala RPSL? That allows providers, for example, to list 
> >   vanilla role accounts and list key techincal personal for, say, AS
> >   registrations.
> >  
> > > 2.  Right now both ASes and Networks have handles and names.  Ideally,
> the
> > > handle should be NET- or ASN- name.  We would like to do some clean-up
> so
> > > that all resources would be the same.  Get rid of an ASNBLK- or NETBLK-,
> > > as well as NETBLK-NET- and the like.  Does anyone have a problem with
> ARIN
> > > possible changing your AS or Net handle/name?  Cathy Murphy will be
> > > running a report to see how many people this will actually affect.
> > 
> > * Are you talking about parent blocks only, or all registration objects?
> >   I certainly like the idea of streamlining the database objects of
> >   netname/handle for parent IP address objects and for AS registrations,
> >   but changing any portion of downstream assignments has the potential
> >   of creating havoc with many providers' SWIP scripts. Please clarify
> > 
> > /david
>