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

On 05/02/2013 23:33, Randy Bush wrote:
> mornin' nick,
> 
> btw, the approach of hiding behind an lir is somewhat interesting.  
> 
> for an r&e institution, such a janet or nordunet member, the reliability
> of the information about the end user may be strong enough to allow the
> ncc to be comfortable.
> 
> in the non-r&e space, it would seem to be just creating more of the same
> problem we have with PI space.  'hiding' behind an lir would be too much
> hiding and not enough lir.

actually if there were some non-discriminatory way of doing this, I
wouldn't be averse to the idea - this is a helpful side-effect of the new
level-field charging mechanism.  Problem is, however much the R&E
organisations tend to be decent, honest and upstanding members of the
Internet community, I don't see how it would be feasible to implement this
without being unfair to the non R&E resource holders.  Level playing fields
are important as a policy goal.

> as you can see, most of the authors of 2012-7 are r&e folk, and much of
> the legacy resources holdings in the region are r&e.

Most of the legacy resources still in use are R&E, but a substantial chunk
of the squatted / abandoned space was never R&E to start with.  The issues
that I have with the current proposal relate to how it will handle these
problem address blocks.

Nick