[ncc-services-wg] 2012-07 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (RIPE NCC Services to Legacy Internet Resource Holders)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On 21 Oct 2013, at 13:15, Rob Evans wrote:

> I (personally, of course) support this proposal.

	Thanks, Rob.

> In the interests of discussion, though, I'll note that my interpretation of 'Registry Service Elements'
> in section 1.1 was any single service provided by the RIR, either current or future. However, in the 
> impact analysis the RIPE NCC has interpreted it as only any one of the specific existing services 
> mentioned in 1.1.  Does that match with the authors' intention?  (If not, does it matter?)

	Thanks for asking for clarification. Perhaps because I've been "on the inside"
	of the process, both as an author and in working out differences of understanding
	between the authors and the RIPE NCC, I'm not seeing the discrepancy that you
	describe. I'm glad of the opportunity to explain my interpretation. If this is not
	consistent with your reading of the texts or if, although convinced, you feel
	that another reasonable reader might not be, I'll appreciate it if you will make
	this clear.

	As the authors intend, "Registry Services" refers to a bundle of services
	which are to be offered to every legacy resource holder whose relationship
	with the RIPE NCC is covered by any of sub-sections 2.1 .. 2.5 in section 2.
	The specification is open-ended so that the bundle may be extended by including
	one or more additional services from time to time. In the impact analysis, the 
	RIPE NCC proposes a process for doing this. As I see it, this process is
	consistent with the intent of the proposal.

	I notice, and didn't before, that in the impact analysis, the NCC uses 
	"Registration Services" instead of "Registry Services". 

	The authors have made a distinction between "Registry Services" as a bundle
	and the particular set of individual "Registry Service Elements" already provided 
	by the RIPE NCC for any given legacy resource prior to establishing a relationship
	under which the full bundle could be offered. The set involved may (in principle)
	vary between one legacy resource and another. In practice, it is unlikely to 
	include only a single service, and also unlikely to include certification.

	The idea is that any legacy resource holder who wishes to have the full bundle
	of Registry Services should enter into a relationship with the RIPE NCC, while
	one to whom certain Registry Service Elements are already provided is protected
	against withdrawal of those specific service elements but cannot claim to be 
	entitled to others.

	I hope this helps.


	Best regards,
	Niall

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAlJlNWAACgkQeYfkja6ZXtnZgACgitekmgt63fPpE3iezwbtTnBU
GJcAmwc1eu0ERKITbbPpNmdHZAS71LGR
=DMR/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----