[ncc-services-wg] 2013-04 New Policy Proposal (Resource Certification for non-RIPE NCC Members)

Hi Martin,

> On Mon, 2013-05-20 at 20:55 +0200, Sander Steffann wrote:
>> About the "Obviously, and not only due to RPKI, a classic deterring
>> safe-guard is required": I don't find this obvious at all.
> 
> Again, what you said (no sed):
> On Mon, 2013-05-20 at 15:57 +0200, Sander Steffann wrote:
>> If the Dutch legal system gets so bad that they require
>> disproportional measures to be taken by the RIPE NCC then I think we
>> have bigger issues and should move the RIPE NCC to a different
>> country.
> 
> I am really interested in hearing how you think the decision model
> should work here:
>  - What are "disproportional" measures?

I was thinking of i.e. taking a whole LIR/ISP offline because one of their customers misbehaves. I think the RIPE NCC have a decent relationship to the LEA's so I doubt if such disproportional measures would happen.

>  - What should be the triggering mechanism for actually moving the RIPE
> NCC to another country (possibly outside of the EU) ?

Silly things like I described above. I never seriously thought of moving the RIPE NCC to a different country though. The line you quote was meant as hypothetical case.

> If you don't see the above "obvious" it appears you haven't follow the
> thought behind your quote (and mis-quote) through... Please do so.

I still don't see any of this as obvious though. It would only be obvious if you are certain these bad things will actually happen, which I very much doubt.

> [...]
> 
> RPKI in this respect is entirely a non-issue!  It's equivalent to TLS to
> whois.ripe.net, ie. merely the transport - not the data source.

I agree.

>  Having backups of the central information systems and clear rules of
> their abuseability, to guard against the [by me, _completely_] expected
> coming slippery slope, however, is entirely the core issue and a quite
> obvious thing to implement.

Ok. This discussion now seems to have gone beyond rPKI policy and so this thread isn't the right place to discuss it. I suggest you take this to the RIPE NCC Board then. I think it is the board's responsibility to take care of these issues, and you seem to have genuine concerns about this. I don't (as I mentioned: I see this only as a hypothetical case, not a realistic one) so I'm stepping aside here and I'll leave the rest of the discussion to the board.

Cheers,
Sander