On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 11:06:34AM +0100, furio ercolessi wrote:
On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 06:38:36AM +0000, Sascha Luck wrote:
On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 04:37:13PM -0800, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: [...]
So there is no trace... no chain of documentation on how an AS got to be an AS. Is that correct? Is that really what you are telling me?
It is not. There is a contract for every independent resource assigned after -525 came into force and when Phase 3 is completed, there will be contracts for legacy ASN/PI resources also. These contracts are confidential and not public information. On this side of the pond, we call it "data protection" and it is the law.
But if the community perceives that the amount of information disclosed in the public database is not adequate to the needs (and I personally regretted to be unable to get the informations that RFG is talking about, several times!), then new information could be supplied in the whois after asking for consent from the resource holder, no ?
So perhaps we can take this opportunity to discuss an extension of the data shown in the public whois.
Have any of you ever consider making a policy proposal to change this? Piotr -- gucio -> Piotr Strzyżewski E-mail: Piotr.Strzyzewski@polsl.pl