[ncc-services-wg] legacy holders paying for registration services and 2012-07v2

On 06/02/2013 20:33, Måns Nilsson wrote:
> It's been mentioned (and with good backing I believe, I've
> seen it from the inside) that a lot of old assignments are to RE
> networks. Most of these are reasonably well maintained. My own limited
> knowledge of commercial entities having assignments points to similar
> data. Mostly. (both I and my wife work at corporations with ERX blocks
> -- my block has a current maintainer and a route object, her block has
> ERX info which still is correct, at least points to the right company)

I'm sure the early academic community assignments are generally accurate
and well maintained, which is unsurprising given the stability of the
institutions which hold them.  And I don't doubt their good faith for a moment.

Having said that, I also know that some blocks which I registered for my
(commercial) employer at the time via InterNIC have somehow ended up in the
possession of one of the local LIRs in IE.  Other address blocks that I've
browsed through look defunct;  others look decidedly squatted.  There seems
to be quite a mixed bag.

> My belief thus is, that most of these entries are good enough that they serve
> a purpose. Some of them are excellent. A better picture can probably be
> had by some more dedicated data-mining.

Some visibility into the data quality would be very useful at this stage,
because from a policy point of view, it would helpful to know whether we
are tilting at windmills or trying to fix a problem which is worth fixing.
 My suspicion veers towards the latter; the opinion of many other people
appears to be the former.

> I am quite upset with a heavy-handed policy being crafted to force every
> possible net into a rigid form. Yes, I've argued that the RIR database
> needs to be complete. And it is in fact so important that estranging
> (which heavy policies will lead to, I'm afraid) is detrimental. 

I can understand why.  As I said, I don't doubt your good faith - or the
good faith of anyone else who's contributed to this discussion. But there
is a real mess there and undoubtedly there will be people and organisations
less well intentioned than you who will attempt to abuse the situation to
benefit themselves at the cost of everyone else.  What I'm trying to do
here is tease out whether it's possible get a balance between the two.

> Ultimately, the NCC and the other RIRen have no actual power over
> early registrations/allocations.

Nobody disputes this, but the RIPE NCC as de-facto registrar has a duty of
good stewardship to these addresses, just as ERX holders have an
expectation of good service.  Coming to an agreement on where each side
stands is something that will benefit everyone.

Nick