Bah @ no-reply-to-list set...
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mark Foster blakjak@gmail.com
Date: Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 7:13 PM
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] Accuracy of Whois Data
To: Sanjaya sanjaya@apnic.net
I say yes! Though I suggest the process is well thought through, as there is
some cleverness that should be applied - around whether positive action is
required to perform the annual validation; around what action should be
taken if a message bounces; _how_ failures will be detected (email addresses
which don't NDR but otherwise don't actually result in a positive answer, do
they count as 'valid' ?)...
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 4:27 PM, Sanjaya sanjaya@apnic.net wrote:
Hi Mark and all,
What APNIC secretariat can do and has been doing is to maintain the
accuracy of the direct allocation/assignment information through our
account relationship with the resource holder. We also ran a continuous
campaign for correct whois information through our trainings and other
outreach activities.
Any feedback sent to APNIC helpdesk about incorrect contact information
will be relayed to the account contacts and corrected based on their input.
The idea proposed in this forum about sending automated reminders to our
members to confirm/update their whois data is good and should be easily
implementable. This may create some rather bulky emails to members with
numerous delegated prefixes, but should be acceptable if sent only
annually. Should we do this?
