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?
Cheers,
________________________________________________________________________
Sanjaya email: sanjaya@apnic.net
Services Area Manager, APNIC sip: sanjaya@voip.apnic.net
http://www.apnic.net phone: +61 7 3858 3100
________________________________________________________________________
* Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.
On 2/02/2010 10:29 AM, Mark Foster wrote:
Thought provoked as a result of the discussion of abuse-c detail...
I'm not sure i've seen anyone pick up the issue of Database Accuracy in
more than a passing fashion. I'm not familiar enough with what-goes-on
but i'd much rather seen APNIC efforts validate the accuracy of info
already in place than focus significant resource on a relatively minor
benefit.
My aforementioned scattergun approach didnt work (apparrently the Indian
ISP concerned don't believe in abuse@, postmaster@ or noc@ addresses,
notwithstanding what's in their whois!) and I am left with the
possiblity of simply blocking an entire /15 at my router as the only
recourse I have against abuse originating from a compromised /32.
As the administrator of (in this particular example) a very small
network with limited means, being able to use whois as an accurate and
validated source of 'real person' POC info would at least help us as a
community to deal to the spammers, botnets and 'sploited boxen in our
midst in a more timely fashion.
So how should APNIC go about ensuring whois accuracy and currency? How
to get this issue moving in a productive direction?
If nothing else, it will dovetail nicely with the latest proposal re
abuse-c.
Mark.
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
