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

On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 12:00:18AM +0000, Nick Hilliard wrote:
>If they want to ignore this policy, then they should go ahead and ignore it
>- until the heat death of the universe.  I have no problem with that.
>
>The point is that running a registry costs money:

>The figures aren't particularly important in this context, but there are
>costs and they are not insubstantial.

I don't think that the cost of providing basic, mostly automated,
services is in any way high enough to make compromising the registry
data an option.

IMO, after we've seen where it leads to, the mindset of "nothing must
ever be free and everything must be bought and paid for" has proven to
be disingenous. Let those few LRHs that DNW to engage with RIRs have
those services pro bono the database.

>If you have alternative proposals for resource certification which don't
>involve some form of due diligence, I'd be mightily interested to hear them :-)

Bin it with extreme prejudice (at least in the form where the RIRs
control the certificates). 

>No need to be scary-conspiratorial here.  I'm not sure if you've noticed,
>but the holders of the address space are working towards a situation with
>the organisation which they own, which will benefit everyone in the long
>run.  Oh wait, I left my tin hat off for a moment and the government mind
>control machine took over, zomg!! :-)

I'm happy with almost anything that does not involve a LRH being forced
to give up any rights to their resources hitherto enjoyed. (I don't
hold any LR, nor am I likely to ever do; this is a matter of principle
to me)

cheers,
Sascha