[anti-abuse-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] 2010-10 New Policy Proposal (Adding reference to sponsoring LIR in inetnum, inet6num and aut-num objects)

On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 12:57:16PM +0000, James Blessing wrote:
> On 12 November 2010 12:47, Emilio Madaio <emadaio at ripe.net> wrote:
> > You can find the full proposal at:
> >
> >    http://ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2010-10.html
> >
> > We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to
> > <anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net> before 10 December 2010.
> 
> Initial thoughts...
> 
> So what happens to 'orphaned' resources? Are RIPE NCC the 'sponsoring'
> LIR in this circumstance?

If you think in terms of business logic, then answer is: the same as
right now. If you think in terms of db logic, then answer is: special
object.

> Does the NCC have the resources to deal with the increased level of
> avuse complaints that may be targeted at them with this change?

In my opinion, there will be no problem. Orphaned resource is temporary
situation.

> Who would be responsible for maintaining the relationship, the
> sponsoring LIR or the End user? Does this have an implication for mnt
> objects?

LIR. But to be honest - proposed new prototypes would make this easier,
and move this responsibility to automatic robot.

Piotr

-- 
gucio -> Piotr Strzyżewski
E-mail: Piotr.Strzyzewski at polsl.pl