[address-policy-wg] [Ticket#2012102901001081] 2012-05 New Draft and Impact Analysis Documents Published (Transparency in Addre [...]

On Sat, Nov 03, 2012 at 06:45:02PM +0000, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>raised by this proposal.  First, privacy issues pertain to ???natural
>persons??? not to the organizational entities (legal persons) that
>typically hold and trade address blocks.

IP resources are held by both legal and natural persons. In the case of
natural persons, privacy implication certainly exist (yes, this is the
case with already available registry data, too).

>Second, and more fundamentally, recording transactions in the way
>suggested by 2012-05 does not alter anyone???s privacy status whether
>they are a natural person or legal person. The possession of an address
>block both before and after the transaction will be recorded in the
>Whois. We are simply making the information about the functioning of
>the transfer market easier to see, compile and analyze.

In my opinion, while whois is a useful and necessary resource, access to
that data needs to be better controlled. IP resource holders are in the
pretty unique position to have nearly all their business relationships
published in a database, access to which is basically uncontrolled. 

Also, referring to recent debate on which RIR services should be free
and which should require payment, this sort of data collation service
should not be provided free to all comers, paid for by the membership.
On the contrary, it should not only require payment (commensurate with
the effort of the RIR) but also an agreement specifying exactly the
purposes for which the data may be used. 

Regards,
Sascha Luck