On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 5:41 PM, Elvis Daniel Velea <elvis@v4escrow.net> wrote:

Hi Sascha,

On 4/26/17 1:26 AM, Sascha Luck [ml] wrote:

Hi Elvis,

On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 07:42:12PM +0300, Elvis Daniel Velea wrote:

What it will do is, for 'transfers' of Legacy space where both the old and the new holder want to have it verified by the RIPE NCC, both parties will need to sign a document where parties authorised to sign will confirm the change of the legacy holder (basically, a transfer).

Oh, this is *voluntary*?

kinda... I am expecting all Buyers to request this process when they decide to receive a Legacy Resource. I would definitely request it if I knew the RIPE NCC can provide an additional confirmation.

Currently as written it's voluntary from the perspective of RIPE policy, but if almost all sophisticated buyers expect it, is it truly voluntary? Furthermore, doesn't having it be voluntary unnecessary expose unsophisticated buyers to a higher risk from fraudulent actors? Is caveat emptor really the fundamental concept we want enshrined in policy for the transfer of Legacy Resources?

Then, what about any LRHs that want the additional protection of RIPE validating any and all attempted transfers of their resource by possibly fraudulent actors. It may be an additional requirement, but that can also be seen as additional layer of protection for both sides. For buyers there is some protection they not dealing with a fraudulent seller. For LRHs it makes it a little harder for someone to fraudulently sell their resources out from under them.

We can't eliminate fraud, but making this mandatory seems like a minimal level of protection for both buyers and LRHs.

Thanks.

===============================================
David Farmer    Email:farmer@umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================