Re: [dp-tf] Re: [apwg-chairs] Re: 91.198.71.0 - 91.198.71.255

[Leo Vegoda <leo.vegoda@localhost]

Hi Gert,

On 20 Nov 2007, at 12:34, Gert Doering wrote:

[...]

> > > Actually I think that this wouldn't be easy today (given that PI
> > > stands for "independent"), but with the new contract framework, we
> > > *do* have the instruments to tag PI/AS objects to "who is the
> > > currently-responsible LIR for this"?
> > Why would we care which LIR sent in a request for a PI assignment and
> > why would we want to require "independent" networks to maintain a
> > contractual relationship with an LIR?
> Because the RIR wants to know how to reach the PI holder.  Either they
> have a direct relation - or if not, they need to go through a LIR.
>
> (At least that seems to be what the RIPE community and the NCC agrees
> to be the way forward).
>
> Whether or not this relationship should be made publically viewable is
> a completely different discussion, of course.
The RIPE NCC has always maintained records of which LIR sent in a  
request for a PI assignments. I assume that this would continue. I  
have doubts about whether publishing this information is appropriate.
> > Identifying LIRs strikes me as a mechanism to label LIRs as either
> > "good" or "bad" and doing this is at best likely to besmirch innocent
> > customers who are unrelated to any abuse. At worst it is likely to
> > cause them problems operating their networks. "Guilty by association"
> > is something we should try to avoid.
> Actually it goes along with the responsibility thing of address
> distribution.  If the LIR doesn't do a proper job in maintaining  
> contact
> data for the end user, the blame falls back onto the LIR, and I think
> that this is actually not such a bad thing.
I doubt that most LIRs are in a position to maintain the end users's  
contact information as well as the end user. I understand that the  
RIPE NCC encourages PI holders to have their own maintainer on the  
inetnum for their address space. The current training material  
mentions this on slide 72:
http://www.ripe.net/training/lir/material/lir_training_oct07-1.pdf

I expect a very well designed web based tool to allow end users to  
manage their contact information would have a far more beneficial  
effect that a contractual requirement for the LIR to do it for the end  
user.
Regards,

Leo