[ncc-services-wg] 2012-07 Discussion Period extended until 21 February 2013 (RIPE NCC Service to Legacy Internet Resource Holders)

	Nick,

On 3 Feb 2013, at 22:57, Nick Hilliard wrote:

> ok, I'll bite.

	Thanks for engaging so thoroughly!

	Apart from nits which I expect will be dealt with in due course,
	and points which are outside what I believe we (the co-authors) see 
	as the scope of this proposal, I understand the following 2 points 
	as your main ones.

> - I don't believe that there is a requirement for section 2.4.
> [...] I don't accept that a legacy resource holder couldn't
> find one out of the current 8800 RIPE NCC members that wouldn't be
> appropriate for a sponsorship contract.

	I see that as a guess.  I hope you're right.  If you are,
	keeping the section appears to be harmless;  otherwise,
	it seems to be needed to fill an unfortunate gap.

> - section 2.5: you can't be serious?  "due to specific enduring or
> temporary circumstances"??  This is a carte-blanche for any LRH to ignore
> this policy until the heat death of the universe.

	I believe that appropriate checks and balances are available.

	I expect that any LRH apparently claiming _undue_ special 
	accommodation under this section would be likely to draw an 
	uncooperative reaction from the RIPE NCC.  Personally (I mean,
	representing the position neither of my employer nor of any of
	the co-authors of the proposal), I would find this quite reasonable.  
	At such a stage, an aggrieved LRH acting in good faith would have 
	recourse to the process of section 5.0.


	ATB
	/Niall