[ncc-services-wg] [policy-announce] 2012-08 New Policy Proposal (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources)

Nick,

On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 05:11:33PM +0100, Nick Hilliard wrote:
>thanks for your comments.  Can you explain how this link doesn't exist if
>the sponsoring LIR has requested RPKI certification on behalf of the PI end
>user, and why this contractual link is invalid in this situation?

That is an argument against RPKI rather than one in favour of
sponsoring-LIR registration, IMO. To whit, the imposition of a
hierarchical structure on a non-hierarchical internet and the creation
of "chains-of-responsibility" from thin air where none exist 
(and shouldn't exist).
It would be better to have the end-user rpki-register their own
resources with the RIR (who can easily verify their validity)

[disclosure of commercial relationships]
>Much the same argument could be made about the requirement to register PA
>address space assignees in the RIPE DB.  Yet we accept that this is a good
>thing.

Not all of these relationships are actually registered, viz DSL or
wireless broadband dynamic ranges. The relationship of end-user and
PA holder is far more obvious by its nature, so I'm not sure much is 
gained by trying to keep it secret. Even so, privacy issues *have*
arisen out of this situation...

With PI it's not the same situation *at all*. PI space is
provider-*independent* and thus may be one last way to prevent a LIR  
becoming collateral damage in an attack on the end-user (eg a
politically controversial organisation)

rgds,
Sascha Luck