[address-policy-wg] 2012-05 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Transparency in Address Block Transfers)

It is odd that one would support the existence of a Whois database that tells anyone and everyone what organization is the registered holder of an address block, and at the same time be against documenting the movement (transfer) of a block from one holder to another. Do you believe the Whois data should all be private? As long as there is a Whois database, it will be possible to know where the address blocks go. The proposal simply makes it easier to track and analyze. So, unless he is willing to advocate eliminating Whois altogether, Sascha Luck's idea to "anonymize all transfer data" doesn't make a lot of sense to me. 

The reasons for making the address market easier to track are primarily policy-related, rather than "operational". The reasons for knowing the buyers and sellers in successful transfers are clearly explained in the initial proposal. We need to be able to assess how the market is working and its economic consequences. The market itself will work better and more efficiently with more transparency. 

You cannot buy and sell companies (legal persons) without the existence of the transaction and a large amount of other information about the companies being known. In most countries (not sure about all of Europe) buyers and sellers of real estate - houses, land - are completely public, as is the price and taxes paid for the property. And all the other RIRs with a transfer market make this information public. I think, therefore, the burden of proof is on those who would want to keep it hidden - actually not hidden, but just harder to access. What is the point of that? Why should RIPE region be an exception to the rest of the world? 

> -----Original Message-----
> I'd go one further and anonymise all transfer data. Who has an
> operational *need-to-know* this data?
> 
> rgds,
> Sascha Luck