[ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 Discussion Period extended until 1 March 2013 (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources)

> The Discussion Period for the proposal 2012-08, "Publication of
> Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources", has been extended
> until 1 March 2013.

the proposal lists three supporting arguments:

> This mechanism provides a simple means for End Users to identify with which
> sponsoring organisation they have a contractual link, in the case this
> information is unknown to the End User.

This appears overly artificial to me: why would an End User not know who
they contracted with and why is a public listing of this information the
appropriate cure?  I do not buy this argument.

> This policy simplifies the mechanism for verification and co-ordination
> between sponsoring organisations when an End User wishes to transfer
> resources from one sponsoring organisation to another.

This is a derivative of the first argument, even though it does not state
the nature of the envisioned 'verification and co-ordination'. It is the
End User's job to make available, where necessary, the supporting
documentation.  I do not buy this argument.

> Publishing this information provides an additional means for tackling
> abuse issues on the Internet.

So, "if all else fails", we claim it will help fighting "abuse"?
What is the underlying expectation here?  Is a 'sponsoring LIR' in any
way responsible for traffic generated (or sunk) at the 'sponsored'
address space?  I cannot buy this argument.

Since the proposal does not list any valid supporting argument, I am opposed.

-Peter