From filiz at ripe.net  Wed Jun 18 12:45:56 2008
From: filiz at ripe.net (Filiz Yilmaz)
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 12:45:56 +0200
Subject: [ca-tf] Certification Proposal
In-Reply-To: <48402459.5060308@uk.easynet.net>
References: <51D68FB7-C325-47BE-8D6A-0CA0D8AF2745@ripe.net> <48402459.5060308@uk.easynet.net>
Message-ID: <6523871A-8AD7-4BDC-96FA-3CDDBEE907D6@ripe.net>

Hello,

As promised, attached please find a proposal in RIPE Proposal  
template. I tried to address all the points that were raised and  
commented by Nigel after RIPE 56.

For your convenience, I attached it in 3 different file  
formats, .doc, pdf and .txt. All files have the same content.

You will see the major points that were agreed by the TF and  
presented in RIPE 56 have not changed but wording is polished. Some  
Rationale is added as part of the proposal template too. I will be on  
holidays for the next 2 weeks so if you can have a look and pass your  
further comments if any until 7 July, it will be great.

Then once it is agreed, I can publish it as a formal proposal,  
announce it to the community for discussion and start its formal PDP  
cycle as agreed in RIPE 56.

Kind regards,
Filiz Yilmaz



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: proposal_in_template.doc
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 27648 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ca-tf/attachments/20080618/7d993d21/attachment.obj 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: proposal_in_template.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 50881 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ca-tf/attachments/20080618/7d993d21/attachment.pdf 
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: proposal_in_template.txt
Url: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ca-tf/attachments/20080618/7d993d21/attachment.txt 
-------------- next part --------------



On 30 May 2008, at 17:59, Nigel Titley wrote:

>>
>>
>> So my question now is: how do we proceed?
> I certainly think that the way to proceed is to offer certification  
> to PA holders first. This is far less fraught with legal problems  
> than anything else. I'm happy for us to widen the policy to cover  
> other objects too.
>
> As to Michael Dillon's problem, I can understand his fears, I've  
> worked for BT too, and the prospect of all your routes dropping out  
> of the routing tables because accounts payable can't get their act  
> together is enough to strike fear into the heart. However, I  
> maintain that a combination of the RIPE NCCs traditional tolerant  
> approach to lateness of payment, together with <insert large  
> company here> appreciating how important this is should do the  
> trick. If you want to build appropriate wording into the proposal,  
> then by all means go ahead, but I think it isn;t necessary. After  
> all, similar things happen with domain names (and with far worse  
> consequences).
>
>
> Nigel
>


From nigel.titley at uk.easynet.net  Tue Jun 24 11:18:43 2008
From: nigel.titley at uk.easynet.net (Nigel Titley)
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 10:18:43 +0100
Subject: [ca-tf] Certification Proposal
In-Reply-To: <6523871A-8AD7-4BDC-96FA-3CDDBEE907D6@ripe.net>
References: <51D68FB7-C325-47BE-8D6A-0CA0D8AF2745@ripe.net> <48402459.5060308@uk.easynet.net> <6523871A-8AD7-4BDC-96FA-3CDDBEE907D6@ripe.net>
Message-ID: <4860BBF3.30508@uk.easynet.net>

Filiz Yilmaz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> As promised, attached please find a proposal in RIPE Proposal
> template. I tried to address all the points that were raised and
> commented by Nigel after RIPE 56.
Looks good. I hope you have addressed Michael Dillon's fears with the
"continuing non-payment" wording.

Thanks for your hard work.

Nigel