[ncc-services-wg] legacy holders paying for registration services and 2012-07v2
Wilfried Woeber Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at
Wed Feb 27 15:04:31 CET 2013
Hank Nussbacher wrote: > At 10:56 25/02/2013 +0100, Daniel Stolpe wrote: > > > >> Yes. And when the owners want an update they may be locked in the >> process och showing that they are in fact the right owners. We have a >> customer, a large corporate group that everybody in my country knows >> about and I would even say most people would agree that the original >> owner of a /16 is now part of this group and ask no further questions >> but what documentation is there now from a merger in 2000? > > > Exactly because of the complexity, the NCC should require payment for > registration services to handle the request. Reality check, please. I cannot relate to complex business mergers and such, but in our environment, the perceived "complexity" is home-grown from the wrong end. Because we try to attack it from a central point of view, instead of making use of the existing "hierarchy" and operational knowledge. > -Hank For a sizeable chunk of such addresses the management of "proof" of holdership is easy: the holders have been in existence (and using IP numbers) since decades, have been conneted to a common infrastructure (a network and an LIR) and still do exist. So, unless someone in Amsterdam wants to see "paper", the whole thing is easy and cheap: the sponsoring LIR confirms the existence of the org and the connectivity to e.g. the NREN. Full stop. Pretty simple + cheap :-) Wilfried.