[address-policy-wg] identity verification for individuals holding Internet number resources

Hi Jim,

On 25.02.2014 23:49, Jim Reid wrote:
> On 25 Feb 2014, at 22:07, Carsten Schiefner
> <ripe-wgs.cs at schiefner.de> wrote:
>
>> what Richard said: what is good enough for (German) banks to e.g.
>> open an account, should be sufficient for the NCC as well, me
>> thinks.
>
> The problem with that Carsten is it doesn't scale. What's good enough
> to open a bank account in Germany might not be good enough to open
> one elsewhere. Or vice versa. It will be verging on the impossible
> for the NCC to keep track of all that across the NCC's service region
> and navigate a path through that maze which is compatible with
> national law across every jurisdiction.
>
> Assuming that "whatever's good enough for a bank account" is or
> should be the criteria to apply here seems disproportionate and
> unreasonable too.

fair point. I am not advocating PostIdent as *THE* means of 
identification - just saying that it is even used by German banks. So it 
appears to be fair to assume that it meets some certain requirements. 
Whether it also would help serving the NCC's objectives is another question.

> I'm not sure there's a justifiable case for the NCC to hold copies of
> passports and what have you AT ALL. Or verifying the bona fides of
> those documents either.
>
> It seems to me that it should be good enough for the NCC to know that
> some chunk of number resources were allocated to an individual called
> Mickey Mouse of Eurodisney and not a Donald Duck (say) at the same
> postal address. [...]

I have a certain feeling that this echos a bit the discussion we are 
currently having in the gTLD world when it comes to validation and 
verification duties of ICANN accredited registrars according to the RAA 
2013.

> PS: Apologies for using a meaningful Subject: header.

You are forgiven! ;-b

Best,

	-C.