North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: I-D (Re: Out of date contact information )

  • From: Paul A Vixie
  • Date: Tue May 07 03:12:58 1996

> As with anything else, report fires to trouble for fastest response.
> It might be worth putting security down to serve a similar role as
> routing (for questions or coordination not requiring immediate
> response).
> ANS uses routing the same way uunet and esnet do.  I think MCI does
> the same.  Netcom is in the minority.

OK, SECURITY and CERT are now different.  TROUBLE and NOC and ROUTING
are now all different.

> BTW - do we want to mention "root" as the system administration of a
> specific host to report things like "your multicast implementation is
> broken and spewing ICMP packets" or other "fix that beast" messages.

No.  This is particular to UNIX.  For this kind of thing, use TROUBLE.
To report it per host, use [email protected]  To report per domain, use
[email protected]

> It would be great if later you could include some of the NIC and IRR
> mailboxes.  Maybe next revision.  For example:
> 	auto-dbm   Automated Registry    Register routing objects
> 		except MCI - [email protected]
> Only problem is I don't think there is consistency in the address
> registries and routing registries use of mail aliases.  Maybe this
> could go on the RA web page and when there is better consistency, put
> this in an RFC.

Thank you for finishing with what was going to be my objection and my
recommendation.  I think that the RADB concept is sufficiently complex
and well advanced that it deserves its own standard-contacts documents,
which would contain a lot more information than just e-mail addresses.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -