[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Definition for "unattended operation"
-
To: "Steven J. Sobol" <sjsobol@nacs.net>
-
Subject: Re: Definition for "unattended operation"
-
From: "Roeland M.J. Meyer" <rmeyer@mhsc.com>
-
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 00:29:33 -0800
-
Cc: Sean Donelan <SEAN@SDG.DRA.COM>, nanog@merit.edu
-
Delivered-To: nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
-
Delivered-To: nanog@segue.merit.edu
-
In-Reply-To: <19990228161916.A12237@nacs.net>
-
References: <990228063125.2d517@SDG.DRA.COM> <990228063125.2d517@SDG.DRA.COM>
-
Sender: owner-nanog@merit.edu
At 04:19 PM 2/28/99 -0500, Steven J. Sobol wrote:
>On Sun, Feb 28, 1999 at 06:31:25AM -0600, Sean Donelan wrote:
>
>> As far as listing additional contact information in the WHOIS database.
>> I encourage providers to exchange contact information for the person(s)
>> who is knowledgeable about the process and emergency shutdown
>> procedures. However, I am beginning to think the WHOIS database
>> operated by NSI no longer best serves the network operation community.
>> I see little purpose in adding additional fields to a database which
>> is so full of useless information already. Listing good contact
>> information just results in those contacts becoming overwhelmed by
>> spammers, vigilantes and UUNET telemarketing. The occasional
>> appropriate message is likely to be lost, or not acted upon because
>> of contact fatigue.
How about a whois that requires the requestor to be a tech contact for a
domain?
___________________________________________________
Roeland M.J. Meyer -
e-mail: mailto:rmeyer@mhsc.com
Internet phone: hawk.lvrmr.mhsc.com
Personal web pages: http://staff.mhsc.com/~rmeyer
Company web-site: http://www.mhsc.com
___________________________________________________
KISS ... gotta love it!
Follow-Ups: