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

On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 10:53:02PM +0200, Michael Markstaller wrote:
>For a working Internet I'd appreciate a definite, clear, confirmed,
>current contact for resources in case of abuse etc..

For the n-th time now in this thread: 
The LIR IS NOT RESPONSIBLE for abuse from a sponsored PI range. Same as
the NCC IS NOT RESPONSIBLE for abuse from a PA range.

As long as people will attempt to MAKE the LIRs responsible for their
sponsored PI, I will oppose any such policy. Harassing a LIR for
perceived abuse from a PI range wastes your time and pisses off the LIR.


>I know some PI-owners (and thats why I fully agree with Randy's
>position and refused to sponsor some of them over all of the years!)
>that have 10yrs outdated contacts in the database, no response on
>abuse for weeks - and no chance for the remaining 99,9% of the honest
>and simply acting trustworthy people (LIRs) out there to contact them.

That, the sponsoring LIR *IS* responsible for since 2007-01, so any
non-contactable PI holders should be shut down when the next payday
comes around at the latest. Also the NCC can shutdown LIRs for incorrect
information, I assume that to include PI information. 

>That's the point where I want to know, whom to contact "upstream" to
>clarify this.. Someone should be able to get contacted (not
>responsible!)..

A sponsoring LIR *may* be the upstream, in which case the ASPATH should
show it. Many LIRs do not route their sponsored PI resources. 

>Just a suggestion: If its only about privacy, a tradeoff could be:
>only visible for LIRs in lirportal (?)

That may be acceptable, at least more so than making it uncontrolledly
public.

rgds,
Sascha Luck