Re: [ncc-services-wg] Admin: request for "Company Registration documents"

[Tom Vest <]

On Oct 15, 2005, at 3:43 AM, Randy Bush wrote:

> and, in this reality, some paper from a government agency seems
> both unnecessary and unhelpful in trusting the identity of an
> lir. we trust them enough to have a clearly tracable financial
> transaction.
So, maybe my understanding of the process/content of billing in RIPE- 
land is deficient.
A "clearly traceable financial transaction" sounds a lot more  
confidence inspiring "any financial transaction at all, so long as it  
arrives on time" (e.g., anonymous money order from 7-11, etc.).

What does RIPE require that the transaction be clearly traceable to?
If it's something that anchors net-identity to some stable,  
persistent, contactable institution, then maybe that's enough.
Can someone share details?

> do we have the right to tell them how they must do business?
I'm glad to have a friend in the society of sophists  :)

I think we do have a right to tell them they have to identity  
themselves in some way in order to *go into* the business, and to  
expect that that information remains accurate over time.

If we don't have the right to expect stable/transparent  
identification at at least the LIR/ASN level, then is there another  
practical, scalable, fair way to secure end-points? If there isn't,  
don't we have a right to declare that such identification is required  
for the greater good of all? The only rights we really enjoy are the  
ones that we've declared this way, and then fought to protect and  
enforce.

Right now operators in some places enjoy the de-facto option of  
complete or selective anonymity (i.e., no one but my friends may  
recognize me, and only to the degree chosen by me; who my friends are  
are determined by me on a transaction-by-transaction basis, subject  
to modification at any time)  I've never heard this declared as a  
right. Is it?

Tom