<html><head></head><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif;font-size:16px"><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_20979"><span>Hi Sandra</span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_20979"><span><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_20979"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21045">Sub-allocation is not the same as transfer. At least not in the current understanding of transfers. There is also a difference between resources and objects in the database.</span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_20979"><span><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_20979"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21168">If a resource holder ´transfers´ part of an allocation to another organisation, then the original resource holder transfers full control, management and responsibility, irrevocably, for that part of his original allocation to the new organisation. All database objects will be modified to reflect the new resource holder for this transferred part.</span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_20979"><span><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_20979"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21365">A sub-allocation is totally different. In this case the resource holder has a contractual agreement with another organisation to provide resources to this organisation with ´some´ control. The sub-allocated resource is still part of the original resource holders allocation and that resource holder is still responsible for the full resource, including the sub-allocated part.</span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_20979"><span><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_20979"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21366">Depending on the contractual details, the new organisation may have rights to make assignments and handle routing for this sub-allocated part. The original resource holder can always take back control of the sub-allocation and delete all related database objects, regardless of who maintains them, using the reclaim functionality.</span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_20979"><span><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_20979"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21425">The original resource holder cannot relinquish responsibility for the sub-allocation unless they decide to transfer it.</span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_20979"><span><br></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_20979"><span id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21510">With regard to ´authority over an object´ in the database, this depends on the object type and is partly about whose maintainers are referenced within the object and, for resource data, partly to which allocation it is (distantly) related to.</span></div><div class="qtdSeparateBR" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_20978"><br></div><div class="qtdSeparateBR" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_20978">cheers</div><div class="qtdSeparateBR" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_20978">denis</div><div class="qtdSeparateBR" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_20978" dir="ltr">co-chair DB-WG<br><br></div><div class="yahoo_quoted" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21031" style="display: block;"> <div style="font-family: Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21030"> <div style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, Sans-Serif; font-size: 16px;" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21029"> <div dir="ltr" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21042"> <font size="2" face="Arial" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21044"> <hr size="1" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21043"> <b><span style="font-weight:bold;">From:</span></b> Sandra Murphy via db-wg <db-wg@ripe.net><br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> Database WG <db-wg@ripe.net> <br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Friday, 18 May 2018, 18:46<br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b> [db-wg] query related to Open Source wg talk on blockchain<br> </font> </div> <div class="y_msg_container" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21028"><br><div dir="ltr" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21041">(A comment about the presentation that I’m asking here because I wasn’t quick enough in typing in the chat window - I was participating remotely.)<br></div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr">There was a question at the mike at the very end of the presentation about blockchain, about the purpose for the work. The answer was that the purpose was to protect origin authorization.<br></div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr">That got me thinking about the blockchain model vs the RIPE model. <br></div><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21027">In times past, I’ve seen RIPE reminders to their members that they are responsible for their entire allocation, even if some of it is sub-allocated. And I’ve seen training that carefully instructs the members how to use mnt-by, mat-lower, mat-routes, etc., to retain control over the sub-allocation portions of their address space, but give some control to the recipient. And warnings that lack of care may result in losing authority, which would require correction by the database staff.<br></div><div dir="ltr" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21032"><br></div><div dir="ltr" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21033">I did find a FAQ for Sub-allocation that says some of this, so hopefully I am not totally off-base.<br></div><div dir="ltr" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21034"><br></div><div dir="ltr" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21035">Is that still the RIPE model, that authority over the sub-allocation is more shared than relinquished?<br></div><div dir="ltr" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21036"><br></div><div dir="ltr" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21037">If I understand blockchain properly, it presumes a model where control is given up entirely when an object is transferred. No two entities can have authority over an object.<br></div><div dir="ltr" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21038"><br></div><div dir="ltr" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21039">Nothing says I’m right about that, either, of course.<br></div><div dir="ltr" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1526607362743_21456"><br></div><div dir="ltr">—Sandy</div><br><br></div> </div> </div> </div></div></body></html>