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

Hank Nussbacher wrote:

> At 10:56 25/02/2013 +0100, Daniel Stolpe wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> Yes. And when the owners want an update they may be locked in the
>> process och showing that they are in fact the right owners. We have a
>> customer, a large corporate group that everybody in my country knows
>> about and I would even say most people would agree that the original
>> owner of a /16 is now part of this group and ask no further questions
>> but what documentation is there now from a merger in 2000?
> 
> 
> Exactly because of the complexity, the NCC should require payment for
> registration services to handle the request.

Reality check, please. I cannot relate to complex business mergers and such,
but in our environment, the perceived "complexity" is home-grown from the
wrong end. Because we try to attack it from a central point of view, instead
of making use of the existing "hierarchy" and operational knowledge.

> -Hank

For a sizeable chunk of such addresses the management of "proof" of holdership
is easy: the holders have been in existence (and using IP numbers) since decades,
have been conneted to a common infrastructure (a network and an LIR) and still
do exist. So, unless someone in Amsterdam wants to see "paper", the whole thing
is easy and cheap: the sponsoring LIR confirms the existence of the org and the
connectivity to e.g. the NREN. Full stop. Pretty simple + cheap :-)

Wilfried.