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

On Wed, 27 Feb 2013, Wilfried Woeber wrote:

> Nick Hilliard wrote:
>> On 27/02/2013 14:12, Nick Hilliard wrote:
>>
>>> so will this be enough to satisfy legal due diligence
>>
>>
>> ... for e.g. certification.
>
> If we take a step back and try to model the tree/mesh of responsibility on
> the operational reality, and install a structure with CA and RA(s), then,
> imho, YES.
>
>> Nick
>
> But the question regarding "legal due diligence" may be asked the other way
> 'round, too: we've got a holder and user of a resource, and someone (an RIR)
> questions the rightfulness (is this an engl. word?), then wouldn't it be
> "fair" for that party to come up with the "documentation", from a legal pov?
>
> I know that this is sort of "funny", from an abuse/security perspective. But,
> what I want to achieve and argue for, is to decouple the registration service
> from the operational (ab)use aspects.
>
> The Registry does have a clear mandate for the former, but not really for the
> latter.
>
> Wilfried.

Well put Wilfried. I agree.

Regards,

Daniel Stolpe

_________________________________________________________________________________
Daniel Stolpe           Tel:  08 - 688 11 81                   stolpe at resilans.se
Resilans AB             Fax:  08 - 55 00 21 63            http://www.resilans.se/
Box 13 054							      556741-1193
103 02 Stockholm