This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[ncc-services-wg] 2012-07 Discussion Period extended until 21 February 2013 (RIPE NCC Service to Legacy Internet Resource Holders)
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] 2012-07 Discussion Period extended until 21 February 2013 (RIPE NCC Service to Legacy Internet Resource Holders)
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] 2012-07 Discussion Period extended until 21 February 2013 (RIPE NCC Service to Legacy Internet Resource Holders)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Randy Bush
randy at psg.com
Wed Feb 6 02:43:55 CET 2013
> Here are some ideas for what could happen if a LRH wasn't engaging (in > no particular order): > > Removal of registration as a short term prospect: no-one is seriously > in favour of this. It's unnecessarily destructive and will not entice > anyone to engage with the RIPE NCC. and is antithetical to the principal reason for the ncc's existence > Removal of some registration data as a short term prospect: e.g. drop > DNS server entries. Again, I think this is unnecessarily aggressive. and harms the rest of us, not the unresponsive entity. > Time limited amnesty: free registration for X period of time if you > engage within Y period. Or some other carrot. > > Free-for-all-time-for-everyone: as irresponsible as short-term > deregistration. this is the status quo and kinda what we are socially and technically committed to. we don't like it. the previously listed sticks are not really what we should be doing. so the proposal seeks carrots. i am quite open to alternative suggestions of tasty parsnips or rutabagas. > Inconvenience: locking of registration data for LRHs who decline to > engage. I.e. the data still remains, but you cannot update the > details, particularly the nameservers. again, contrary to our primary mission, accurate data. > Removal of registration as a long term prospect: this will be > necessary. very hard procedurally and legally. > There is undoubtedly a pile of ERX address space which is either > squatted or abandoned. rigourously prove it such that it will stand up when we get our asses sued off. benefit::risk very very low. > As a long term objective, I think that there is some duty of > stewardship that makes de-registration of data a requirement. Maybe > we don't need to deal with it in 2012-07, but it is inevitable on a > 20-50 year basis. i think the costs of vigilatism are far more than the possible benefits. and 20-50 years from now, we will all be running in 10/8 anyway, or is it 100.64/10? randy
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] 2012-07 Discussion Period extended until 21 February 2013 (RIPE NCC Service to Legacy Internet Resource Holders)
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] 2012-07 Discussion Period extended until 21 February 2013 (RIPE NCC Service to Legacy Internet Resource Holders)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]