[anti-abuse-wg] Policy proposal: closing allocation/assignment window, was Policy disallowing spam from RIPE blocks

Suresh,

On Wed, 2011-03-09 at 20:19 +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> And if you want policy proposals, please do let me know what you think
> about some concrete proposals that have emerged from all this argument
> and ad hominem

THANK YOU. :)

I'll address these in separate replies to try to remain focused on each
one.

> 1. Closing the allocation window / giving LIRs less leeway in
> approvals [so there should be no difference in submitting a request
> through a LIR, or through the RIR]

Do you mean the "assignment window"?

As I understand it, when you get an allocation from the RIPE NCC you
can't actually use it for anything until you get approval to assign that
space. After a certain amount of time, you have proven yourself
more-or-less trustworthy, then you get an assignment window, and can
make smallish assignments yourself without prior approval. These
assignments are reviewed - both by automated tools and by humans - if
and when you ask for another allocation.

These assignment windows can get raised or lowered depending on how the
LIR behaves. Having an experienced network administrator leave and
replaced by someone without a clue may result in it getting lowered, for
example. :)

I think the assignment window is more-or-less okay as it is today.

-----

If you mean the process by which provider-independent (PI) space is
assigned, then as I understand it this REQUIRES an LIR to make the
request on your behalf. I assume that the RIPE NCC reviews each request,
the same as they would any address request.

To be honest, I don't really understand what the LIR role in this whole
process is, other than maybe companies prefer to work with a local
company that speaks their language, is in their time zone, and
understands their business environment. 

The RIPE NCC is currently finishing implementing a newish requirement
that PI blocks have a contract with either the RIPE NCC or with an LIR.
Based on this is should be possible to revoke misused PI space (where
"misuse" is defined as "not being used for the purpose assigned under",
*not* defined as "being used for things I do not like").

In theory that policy already exists for all RIPE NCC space, I think. Do
you think we should try to push for the RIPE NCC to actually implement
this policy? Do you think there should be further penalties for LIRs
involved with arranging bogus PI assignments?

--
Shane