[ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 New Policy Proposal (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources)
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 New Policy Proposal (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources)
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 New Policy Proposal (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sascha Luck
lists-ripe at c4inet.net
Thu Oct 18 00:01:13 CEST 2012
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 11:34:52PM +0200, Michael Markstaller wrote: >What I don't understand now: where is the need for the PI-owner to >stay more or less anonymous and the NCC over three edges to follow up >on that.. Nonono, the PI "owner" is never anonymous, they must be registered in the db, there has to be a contract and the NCC makes sure the user exists (the LIR can't even do that themselves!) >Just to keep a LIR's customers secret can't be the main argument - or > again - is unfair - as if I remember policies right, as LIR with PA I >have to tell in DB my customer.. Well, IMO that deserves some review as well from a privacy POV but is not part of this proposal. However, PA space is different as that is "owned" by the LIR and merely assigned to the end-user. That makes the LIR responsible for the actions of the assignee (via AUP etc). rgds, Sascha
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 New Policy Proposal (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources)
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] 2012-08 New Policy Proposal (Publication of Sponsoring LIR for Independent Number Resources)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]