[ncc-services-wg] 2012-07 New Policy Proposal (RIPE NCC Services to Legacy Internet Resource Holders)

Hi Nick,

>> I don't agree at all with you here. The proposal says that the RIPE NCC
>> has to deliver certain services (registry + reverse DNS) and that the
>> legacy resource holders have to sign contracts (and very probably have
>> to pay some money, like with 2007-01) and maintain their data in the
>> registry.
> 
> I read it differently, in that there was no requirement for erx holders to
> sign anything if they chose not to, and that if they chose not to, the
> policy proposal required that the RIPE NCC would still provide services
> indefinitely.  Could you confirm whether this is the case?

Well, that is still an ongoing discussion. So far we have been looking at legacy resource holders that want to cooperate with the RIPE NCC. What happens when a legacy resource holder refuses to sign anything should be discussed here I think. My personal opinion is that at least a best effort attempt should be made to always keep the RIPE database as accurate as possible, even without any signed contracts. That is because keeping the RIPE database accurate is important for the whole community, not just for the legacy resource holder.

> [...]
> 
> Ok.  In the interim, I think we need some clarity from the RIPE NCC about
> the status of the content on the web tree with this root:
> 
> http://www.ripe.net/lir-services/resource-management/legacy-space

Yes, I would also appreciate that!
Sander