Hi,

the bigger issue I see with this change is, that there is no RIPE-area-wide common post-ident. For the German Post-Ident it is the requestor of identification who is in charge to initiate the post-ident process and who is in charge to match the token returned to the right customer. Even the name of the identified person is not necessarily given on the confirmation receipt. As I think there are at least a dozen of different identification services, each of them in the individual country "well accepted", I think that the implementation of such service would lead to a big workload for the RIPE-staff.

BR Jens


On 25. Februar 2014 22:54:00 MEZ, Nick Hilliard <nick@inex.ie> wrote: 
On 25/02/2014 21:34, David Monosov wrote:

 It's outstanding that the RIPE NCC has taken it upon itself to fulfill the
 community's wishes as set forth in 2007-01 with utmost care and competence,
 but I have sincere doubts that the people who championed 2007-01 envisioned it
 as means of turning the NCC into a databank of personal identity documents.


there are two separate issues to consider, firstly that the ripe ncc has a
duty to authenticate PI holders to some degree of due diligence, and
secondly how this is intertwined with the much more stringent legal
requirements of resource certification.

I don't see any particular reason not to accept post ident (and similar
authentication schemes with legal recognition in their own countries) for
the purposes of assignment of resources.  OTOH I could see how the ripe ncc
would have trouble making a claim of certification without unambiguous
formal legal authentication via e.g. photocopies of ID documents, notarised
endorsements, etc.

Nick



!DSPAM:637,530d1132149033975113532!

--
Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet. 
-- 
Opteamax GmbH - RIPE-Team
Jens Ott

Opteamax GmbH

Simrockstr. 4b
53619 Rheinbreitbach

Tel.:  +49 2224 969500
Fax:   +49 2224 97691059
Email: jo@opteamax.de

HRB: 23144, Amtsgericht Montabaur
Umsatzsteuer-ID.: DE264133989