Improving Identification of RIPE NCC Members and Independent Resource Holders by Publishing Company Registration Numbers
Dear colleagues, Following my presentation at the RIPE 91 Address Policy Working Group session, I’d like to propose adding a company registration number to the organisation object type. Problem Statement: The RIPE Database should allow users to uniquely identify Internet Number Resource holders. Today, organisation objects linked to RIPE NCC co-maintained inetnum, inet6num, and aut-num objects include the validated legal organisation name and country code where the resource holder is legally registered. However, these attributes alone are not always sufficient to uniquely identify a legal entity, for three main reasons: 1. Identical names: In some jurisdictions, different companies can legally register with the same or very similar names. 2. Transliteration issues: In countries using non-Latin scripts, converting names from and into Latin characters can produce inconsistent or inaccurate results. 3. Data discrepancies: Differences between the validated legal information (org-name and country) and the contact details maintained by the resource holder (for example, a postal address in another country) can create confusion and make identification more difficult. Solution Definition: Introduce a new reg-nr: attribute for RIPE NCC co-maintained organisation objects, containing verified company registration numbers issued by national authorities. The RIPE NCC already holds this information for ~99% of resource holders that are legal entities. Publishing a unique and verifiable registration number will significantly improve the ability of RIPE Database users to accurately identify resource holders and cross-check them in national company registries. Only publicly available registration numbers of legal entities will be published. Natural persons remain explicitly out of scope. Please let me know your feedback. Questions and comments are welcome. Regards Marco Schmidt Manager Registration Services RIPE NCC
Hi, On Mon, Nov 17, 2025 at 12:01:02PM +0100, Marco Schmidt wrote:
Solution Definition: Introduce a new reg-nr: attribute for RIPE NCC co-maintained organisation objects, containing verified company registration numbers issued by national authorities. The RIPE NCC already holds this information for ~99% of resource holders that are legal entities.
From my limited point of view (*), this sounds a useful information to add. It's public anyway, for registered companies, so GDPR concerns should not arise. (*) "company view in germany", other views might differ Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Karin Schuler, Sebastian Cler Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
Hi Marco, Thanks for working on this proposal. On 17 Nov 2025, at 12:01, Marco Schmidt <mschmidt@ripe.net> wrote:
Introduce a new reg-nr: attribute for RIPE NCC co-maintained organisation objects, containing verified company registration numbers issued by national authorities.
Will this have some kind of scope to a country/registry? If I see a number, how do I know where to look it up? It might even be ambiguous without scope, as the same number might be used in different company registries. I don't know if all countries have a single registry.
Only publicly available registration numbers of legal entities will be published. Natural persons remain explicitly out of scope.
So for sole proprietorships where, at least in NL, the person is the company, no new numbers will be published, right? Sasha
Hello Sasha, Thank you for your questions. On 17/11/2025 12:18, Sasha Romijn wrote:
Hi Marco,
Thanks for working on this proposal.
On 17 Nov 2025, at 12:01, Marco Schmidt <mschmidt@ripe.net> wrote:
Introduce a new reg-nr: attribute for RIPE NCC co-maintained organisation objects, containing verified company registration numbers issued by national authorities. Will this have some kind of scope to a country/registry? If I see a number, how do I know where to look it up? It might even be ambiguous without scope, as the same number might be used in different company registries. I don't know if all countries have a single registry. For countries with multiple regional company registries, such as Germany or the USA, we would specify which registry contains the legal entity’s record. For countries with a single national registry, the existing attribute with country code of legal registration together with the new company registration number attribute should be sufficient to identify the resource holder. Only publicly available registration numbers of legal entities will be published. Natural persons remain explicitly out of scope. So for sole proprietorships where, at least in NL, the person is the company, no new numbers will be published, right? Yes, that is correct. In the case of sole proprietorships no registration number will be published. The new attribute will apply only to legal entities.
Sasha
I hope this clarifies. Kind regards, Marco Schmidt RIPE NCC
On 17 Nov 2025, at 13:48, Marco Schmidt <mschmidt@ripe.net> wrote: [..] On 17/11/2025 12:18, Sasha Romijn wrote:
Hi Marco,
Thanks for working on this proposal.
On 17 Nov 2025, at 12:01, Marco Schmidt <mschmidt@ripe.net> wrote:
Introduce a new reg-nr: attribute for RIPE NCC co-maintained organisation objects, containing verified company registration numbers issued by national authorities. Will this have some kind of scope to a country/registry? If I see a number, how do I know where to look it up? It might even be ambiguous without scope, as the same number might be used in different company registries. I don't know if all countries have a single registry. For countries with multiple regional company registries, such as Germany or the USA, we would specify which registry contains the legal entity’s record. For countries with a single national registry, the existing attribute with country code of legal registration together with the new company registration number attribute should be sufficient to identify the resource holder.
This sounds like a good thing to have. Can we get that in WHOIS and then also have that as a dump for easy ingestion? An example WHOIS entry on how this could look like could be a good example. I think having both the URL of the company register (so that one does not have to figure out what it is), be that a link to a contact address that one has to call to get details, or that has a public lookup interface can help a lot. Eg Switzerland has https://zefix.admin.ch <https://zefix.admin.ch/> enter the name and one can see what is behind the company and if that looks like something that is legal or barely legal. At least, it will solve the big problem of companies claiming to have a POBox in one country and then having their "company" registered in the fun countries that do not seem to have any legal process or escalation paths whatsoever. Unfortunately there are many of those. One additional thing would be as it is not GPDR sensitive, that this information is also exposed in a DB dump, so that one can easily take such a dump, and mark prefixes as 'fun traffic'. This will help with scoring in various locations to what extent traffic might actually just be anonymous / disrespecting of the law or not. And yes, it sucks then for entities that are actually located in those countries, they are trying to get by and sucked into that too :(... Greets, Jeroen
Hello Jeroen, Thanks for your suggestions,
On 17 Nov 2025, at 14:47, Jeroen Massar via db-wg <db-wg@ripe.net> wrote:
On 17 Nov 2025, at 13:48, Marco Schmidt <mschmidt@ripe.net> wrote: [..] On 17/11/2025 12:18, Sasha Romijn wrote:
Hi Marco,
Thanks for working on this proposal.
On 17 Nov 2025, at 12:01, Marco Schmidt <mschmidt@ripe.net> wrote:
Introduce a new reg-nr: attribute for RIPE NCC co-maintained organisation objects, containing verified company registration numbers issued by national authorities. Will this have some kind of scope to a country/registry? If I see a number, how do I know where to look it up? It might even be ambiguous without scope, as the same number might be used in different company registries. I don't know if all countries have a single registry. For countries with multiple regional company registries, such as Germany or the USA, we would specify which registry contains the legal entity’s record. For countries with a single national registry, the existing attribute with country code of legal registration together with the new company registration number attribute should be sufficient to identify the resource holder.
This sounds like a good thing to have.
Can we get that in WHOIS and then also have that as a dump for easy ingestion?
We plan to include the reg-nr: attribute in the daily Whois dump and split files.
An example WHOIS entry on how this could look like could be a good example.
I think having both the URL of the company register (so that one does not have to figure out what it is), be that a link to a contact address that one has to call to get details, or that has a public lookup interface can help a lot. Eg Switzerland has https://zefix.admin.ch <https://zefix.admin.ch/> enter the name and one can see what is behind the company and if that looks like something that is legal or barely legal.
We plan to include a URL to the company register on the database web query page, where possible (based on the number format and the legal country: attribute value). However I'd prefer not to encode the number as a URL in the reg-nr: attribute itself. Making a link for interactive users to click is convenient but makes it harder for client programs to parse (there's no standard URL format for registration numbers that I'm aware of). Also we may not be able to identify a URL for all types of registration numbers (it depends on the registry). And if a URL ever changes, it's easier to update the web application than re-synchronise all affected registration numbers to the RIPE database.
At least, it will solve the big problem of companies claiming to have a POBox in one country and then having their "company" registered in the fun countries that do not seem to have any legal process or escalation paths whatsoever. Unfortunately there are many of those.
Correct, in addition to the legal country attribute, the aim is to make it easier to identify the resource holder.
One additional thing would be as it is not GPDR sensitive, that this information is also exposed in a DB dump, so that one can easily take such a dump, and mark prefixes as 'fun traffic'. This will help with scoring in various locations to what extent traffic might actually just be anonymous / disrespecting of the law or not. And yes, it sucks then for entities that are actually located in those countries, they are trying to get by and sucked into that too :(...
If I understand correctly, this is already possible using the country: attribute which identifies the legal address of the resource holder organisation. Regards Ed Shryane RIPE NCC
On 17 Nov 2025, at 15:52, Edward Shryane <eshryane@ripe.net> wrote: [..]
An example WHOIS entry on how this could look like could be a good example.
I think having both the URL of the company register (so that one does not have to figure out what it is), be that a link to a contact address that one has to call to get details, or that has a public lookup interface can help a lot. Eg Switzerland has https://zefix.admin.ch <https://zefix.admin.ch/> enter the name and one can see what is behind the company and if that looks like something that is legal or barely legal.
We plan to include a URL to the company register on the database web query page, where possible (based on the number format and the legal country: attribute value).
However I'd prefer not to encode the number as a URL in the reg-nr: attribute itself. Making a link for interactive users to click is convenient but makes it harder for client programs to parse (there's no standard URL format for registration numbers that I'm aware of). Also we may not be able to identify a URL for all types of registration numbers (it depends on the registry). And if a URL ever changes, it's easier to update the web application than re-synchronise all affected registration numbers to the RIPE database.
Agree, a separate attribute, eg "reg-url" would be the way to go indeed. Maybe a "reg-country" option separately to indicate the country could be useful (e.g. in the case of Germany as one example), while the "reg-url" could point directly to the registration entity's site. It would also allow easily grouping which registry each comes from, thus per URL, similar to 'source'. To then automate or so automatic fetching would be something the user can do. though most of these sites do not allow automation and require payment, but that is then upto the client to handle, RIPE NCC should not be bothered with that.
At least, it will solve the big problem of companies claiming to have a POBox in one country and then having their "company" registered in the fun countries that do not seem to have any legal process or escalation paths whatsoever. Unfortunately there are many of those.
Correct, in addition to the legal country attribute, the aim is to make it easier to identify the resource holder.
One additional thing would be as it is not GPDR sensitive, that this information is also exposed in a DB dump, so that one can easily take such a dump, and mark prefixes as 'fun traffic'. This will help with scoring in various locations to what extent traffic might actually just be anonymous / disrespecting of the law or not. And yes, it sucks then for entities that are actually located in those countries, they are trying to get by and sucked into that too :(...
If I understand correctly, this is already possible using the country: attribute which identifies the legal address of the resource holder organisation.
Not for quite a few who have "POBoxes" in countries other than the registry is claimed to be a "registered company". These additions will make all that much more visible though, thanks! Greets, Jeroen
Hello Jeroen,
On 17 Nov 2025, at 16:13, Jeroen Massar <jeroen@massar.ch> wrote:
On 17 Nov 2025, at 15:52, Edward Shryane <eshryane@ripe.net> wrote: [..]
An example WHOIS entry on how this could look like could be a good example.
I think having both the URL of the company register (so that one does not have to figure out what it is), be that a link to a contact address that one has to call to get details, or that has a public lookup interface can help a lot. Eg Switzerland has https://zefix.admin.ch <https://zefix.admin.ch/> enter the name and one can see what is behind the company and if that looks like something that is legal or barely legal.
We plan to include a URL to the company register on the database web query page, where possible (based on the number format and the legal country: attribute value).
However I'd prefer not to encode the number as a URL in the reg-nr: attribute itself. Making a link for interactive users to click is convenient but makes it harder for client programs to parse (there's no standard URL format for registration numbers that I'm aware of). Also we may not be able to identify a URL for all types of registration numbers (it depends on the registry). And if a URL ever changes, it's easier to update the web application than re-synchronise all affected registration numbers to the RIPE database.
Agree, a separate attribute, eg "reg-url" would be the way to go indeed.
Maybe a "reg-country" option separately to indicate the country could be useful (e.g. in the case of Germany as one example), while the "reg-url" could point directly to the registration entity's site.
It would also allow easily grouping which registry each comes from, thus per URL, similar to 'source'.
To then automate or so automatic fetching would be something the user can do. though most of these sites do not allow automation and require payment, but that is then upto the client to handle, RIPE NCC should not be bothered with that.
To be clear, we propose to only add the registration number to the RIPE database in a "reg-nr:" attribute. It is for the client to decide how to process the registration number. We will only include a URL to the company register on the database web query results where possible. Regards Ed Shryane RIPE NCC
Hi Ed,
On Nov 17, 2025, at 09:52, Edward Shryane <eshryane@ripe.net> wrote:
We plan to include the reg-nr: attribute in the daily Whois dump and split files.
The possible impact is that today, the contact addresses of inetnums receive spam offers of resource transfer. After implementing this proposal, spammers will knock on their doors with more targeted offers, social engineering attacks, etc. Even removing most of the personal data from dump files didn't prevent them from doing so. Publishing the company reg data will make this task easier. -- Best regards, Sergey Myasoedov
I have been a recorded contact against resources in another RIR, and I have received this class of spam. I was the titular holder/contact of a number of ranges reserved to APNIC Labs amongst other things. I don't personally think this is a good basis to not have information in the public view. The wider community is entitled to have a path to identify who controls and operates this class of asset. The burden of spam cleaning is a cost which. has to be borne by the holder in the public interest. I realise there are other threats in this. I'm not arguing there are no downside risks to PII being associated with address management records, just that I do not think "but you will get spam" is not a strong enough reason to exclude it. (ex RIR staffer now contractor) -G
Hi George,
On Nov 17, 2025, at 10:55, George Michaelson <ggm@algebras.org> wrote:
I realise there are other threats in this. I'm not arguing there are no downside risks to PII being associated with address management records, just that I do not think "but you will get spam" is not a strong enough reason to exclude it.
This isn't just about spam. Why registration of a domain name won't pose any extra risk for the name holder? And why registration of IPv4/v6/ASN means that you'll receive spam/phishing messages at a minimum? -- Best regards, Sergey Myasoedov
Hello Jeroen,
On 17 Nov 2025, at 14:47, Jeroen Massar via db-wg <db-wg@ripe.net> wrote:
On 17 Nov 2025, at 13:48, Marco Schmidt <mschmidt@ripe.net> wrote: [..] On 17/11/2025 12:18, Sasha Romijn wrote:
Hi Marco,
Thanks for working on this proposal.
On 17 Nov 2025, at 12:01, Marco Schmidt <mschmidt@ripe.net> wrote:
Introduce a new reg-nr: attribute for RIPE NCC co-maintained organisation objects, containing verified company registration numbers issued by national authorities. Will this have some kind of scope to a country/registry? If I see a number, how do I know where to look it up? It might even be ambiguous without scope, as the same number might be used in different company registries. I don't know if all countries have a single registry. For countries with multiple regional company registries, such as Germany or the USA, we would specify which registry contains the legal entity’s record. For countries with a single national registry, the existing attribute with country code of legal registration together with the new company registration number attribute should be sufficient to identify the resource holder.
This sounds like a good thing to have.
Can we get that in WHOIS and then also have that as a dump for easy ingestion?
An example WHOIS entry on how this could look like could be a good example.
Here is an example for the RIPE NCC itself, adding a reg-nr: attribute : organisation: ORG-RIEN1-RIPE org-name: Reseaux IP Europeens Network Coordination Centre (RIPE NCC) country: NL org-type: LIR descr: RIPE NCC Operations address: P.O. Box 10096 address: 1001 EB address: Amsterdam address: NETHERLANDS reg-nr: 40539632 # added registration number phone: +31205354444 fax-no: +31205354445 admin-c: MENN1-RIPE admin-c: MDIR-RIPE abuse-c: ops4-ripe mnt-ref: RIPE-NCC-HM-MNT mnt-ref: RIPE-NCC-MNT mnt-by: RIPE-NCC-HM-MNT mnt-by: RIPE-NCC-MNT created: 2012-03-09T13:21:52Z last-modified: 2023-12-05T13:40:03Z source: RIPE # Filtered The country: code is NL, so the registry is the KvK : Go to https://www.kvk.nl/en/search/ and enter "40539632". Regards Ed Shryane RIPE NCC
On Mon, 17 Nov 2025 at 11:01, Marco Schmidt <mschmidt@ripe.net> wrote: [...]
Solution Definition: Introduce a new reg-nr: attribute for RIPE NCC co-maintained organisation objects, containing verified company registration numbers issued by national authorities. The RIPE NCC already holds this information for ~99% of resource holders that are legal entities.
Publishing a unique and verifiable registration number will significantly improve the ability of RIPE Database users to accurately identify resource holders and cross-check them in national company registries.
This seems like a good idea. Thanks, Leo
On Mon, 17 Nov 2025 at 11:20, Leo Vegoda <leo@vegoda.org> wrote:
On Mon, 17 Nov 2025 at 11:01, Marco Schmidt <mschmidt@ripe.net> wrote:
[...]
Solution Definition: Introduce a new reg-nr: attribute for RIPE NCC co-maintained organisation objects, containing verified company registration numbers issued by national authorities. The RIPE NCC already holds this information for ~99% of resource holders that are legal entities.
Publishing a unique and verifiable registration number will significantly improve the ability of RIPE Database users to accurately identify resource holders and cross-check them in national company registries.
This seems like a good idea.
Oh, and it would be good if support from this extra piece of data is also available via RDAP and not just whois. In general, users should get the same data back however they query the database. Thanks, Leo
Hello Leo,
On 17 Nov 2025, at 15:05, Leo Vegoda <leo@vegoda.org> wrote:
On Mon, 17 Nov 2025 at 11:20, Leo Vegoda <leo@vegoda.org> wrote:
On Mon, 17 Nov 2025 at 11:01, Marco Schmidt <mschmidt@ripe.net> wrote:
[...]
Solution Definition: Introduce a new reg-nr: attribute for RIPE NCC co-maintained organisation objects, containing verified company registration numbers issued by national authorities. The RIPE NCC already holds this information for ~99% of resource holders that are legal entities.
Publishing a unique and verifiable registration number will significantly improve the ability of RIPE Database users to accurately identify resource holders and cross-check them in national company registries.
This seems like a good idea.
Oh, and it would be good if support from this extra piece of data is also available via RDAP and not just whois.
The Database team intends to extend RDAP to include the registration number. We will publish an implementation plan separately.
In general, users should get the same data back however they query the database.
I agree! Regards Ed Shryane RIPE NCC
This seems sensible. Nick Marco Schmidt wrote on 17/11/2025 11:01:
Dear colleagues,
Following my presentation at the RIPE 91 Address Policy Working Group session, I’d like to propose adding a company registration number to the organisation object type.
Problem Statement: The RIPE Database should allow users to uniquely identify Internet Number Resource holders. Today, organisation objects linked to RIPE NCC co-maintained inetnum, inet6num, and aut-num objects include the validated legal organisation name and country code where the resource holder is legally registered. However, these attributes alone are not always sufficient to uniquely identify a legal entity, for three main reasons:
1. Identical names: In some jurisdictions, different companies can legally register with the same or very similar names. 2. Transliteration issues: In countries using non-Latin scripts, converting names from and into Latin characters can produce inconsistent or inaccurate results. 3. Data discrepancies: Differences between the validated legal information (org-name and country) and the contact details maintained by the resource holder (for example, a postal address in another country) can create confusion and make identification more difficult.
Solution Definition: Introduce a new reg-nr: attribute for RIPE NCC co-maintained organisation objects, containing verified company registration numbers issued by national authorities. The RIPE NCC already holds this information for ~99% of resource holders that are legal entities.
Publishing a unique and verifiable registration number will significantly improve the ability of RIPE Database users to accurately identify resource holders and cross-check them in national company registries.
Only publicly available registration numbers of legal entities will be published. Natural persons remain explicitly out of scope.
Please let me know your feedback. Questions and comments are welcome.
Regards Marco Schmidt Manager Registration Services RIPE NCC
----- To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, please visit: https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/db-wg.ripe.net/ As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the email matching your subscription before you can change your settings. More details at: https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/
Hi Marco,
Introduce a new reg-nr: attribute for RIPE NCC co-maintained organisation objects, containing verified company registration numbers issued by national authorities. The RIPE NCC already holds this information for ~99% of resource holders that are legal entities.
What is the main goal for making this information publicly available? -- Best regards, Sergey Myasoedov
On Nov 17, 2025, at 06:01, Marco Schmidt <mschmidt@ripe.net> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
Following my presentation at the RIPE 91 Address Policy Working Group session, I’d like to propose adding a company registration number to the organisation object type.
Problem Statement: The RIPE Database should allow users to uniquely identify Internet Number Resource holders. Today, organisation objects linked to RIPE NCC co-maintained inetnum, inet6num, and aut-num objects include the validated legal organisation name and country code where the resource holder is legally registered. However, these attributes alone are not always sufficient to uniquely identify a legal entity, for three main reasons:
1. Identical names: In some jurisdictions, different companies can legally register with the same or very similar names. 2. Transliteration issues: In countries using non-Latin scripts, converting names from and into Latin characters can produce inconsistent or inaccurate results. 3. Data discrepancies: Differences between the validated legal information (org-name and country) and the contact details maintained by the resource holder (for example, a postal address in another country) can create confusion and make identification more difficult.
Solution Definition: Introduce a new reg-nr: attribute for RIPE NCC co-maintained organisation objects, containing verified company registration numbers issued by national authorities. The RIPE NCC already holds this information for ~99% of resource holders that are legal entities.
Publishing a unique and verifiable registration number will significantly improve the ability of RIPE Database users to accurately identify resource holders and cross-check them in national company registries.
Only publicly available registration numbers of legal entities will be published. Natural persons remain explicitly out of scope.
Please let me know your feedback. Questions and comments are welcome.
Regards Marco Schmidt Manager Registration Services RIPE NCC
----- To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, please visit: https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/db-wg.ripe.net/ As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the email matching your subscription before you can change your settings. More details at: https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/
Hey Marco, I would find this proposal particularly useful for things like KYC and sanctions screening. So a +1 from me, having this added would be a nice quality of life improvement On Mon, 17 Nov 2025 at 11:01, Marco Schmidt <mschmidt@ripe.net> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
Following my presentation at the RIPE 91 Address Policy Working Group session, I’d like to propose adding a company registration number to the organisation object type.
Problem Statement: The RIPE Database should allow users to uniquely identify Internet Number Resource holders. Today, organisation objects linked to RIPE NCC co-maintained inetnum, inet6num, and aut-num objects include the validated legal organisation name and country code where the resource holder is legally registered. However, these attributes alone are not always sufficient to uniquely identify a legal entity, for three main reasons:
1. Identical names: In some jurisdictions, different companies can legally register with the same or very similar names. 2. Transliteration issues: In countries using non-Latin scripts, converting names from and into Latin characters can produce inconsistent or inaccurate results. 3. Data discrepancies: Differences between the validated legal information (org-name and country) and the contact details maintained by the resource holder (for example, a postal address in another country) can create confusion and make identification more difficult.
Solution Definition: Introduce a new reg-nr: attribute for RIPE NCC co-maintained organisation objects, containing verified company registration numbers issued by national authorities. The RIPE NCC already holds this information for ~99% of resource holders that are legal entities.
Publishing a unique and verifiable registration number will significantly improve the ability of RIPE Database users to accurately identify resource holders and cross-check them in national company registries.
Only publicly available registration numbers of legal entities will be published. Natural persons remain explicitly out of scope.
Please let me know your feedback. Questions and comments are welcome.
Regards Marco Schmidt Manager Registration Services RIPE NCC
----- To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, please visit: https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/db-wg.ripe.net/ As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the email matching your subscription before you can change your settings. More details at: https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/
Hello, This info is very sesible, but for goverments there are no additional information, but many scammers will find this info very useful. I'm very against this idea. 17.11.2025 19:15, Ben Cartwright-Cox via db-wg пишет:
Hey Marco,
I would find this proposal particularly useful for things like KYC and sanctions screening.
So a +1 from me, having this added would be a nice quality of life improvement
On Mon, 17 Nov 2025 at 11:01, Marco Schmidt<mschmidt@ripe.net> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
Following my presentation at the RIPE 91 Address Policy Working Group session, I’d like to propose adding a company registration number to the organisation object type.
Problem Statement: The RIPE Database should allow users to uniquely identify Internet Number Resource holders. Today, organisation objects linked to RIPE NCC co-maintained inetnum, inet6num, and aut-num objects include the validated legal organisation name and country code where the resource holder is legally registered. However, these attributes alone are not always sufficient to uniquely identify a legal entity, for three main reasons:
1. Identical names: In some jurisdictions, different companies can legally register with the same or very similar names. 2. Transliteration issues: In countries using non-Latin scripts, converting names from and into Latin characters can produce inconsistent or inaccurate results. 3. Data discrepancies: Differences between the validated legal information (org-name and country) and the contact details maintained by the resource holder (for example, a postal address in another country) can create confusion and make identification more difficult.
Solution Definition: Introduce a new reg-nr: attribute for RIPE NCC co-maintained organisation objects, containing verified company registration numbers issued by national authorities. The RIPE NCC already holds this information for ~99% of resource holders that are legal entities.
Publishing a unique and verifiable registration number will significantly improve the ability of RIPE Database users to accurately identify resource holders and cross-check them in national company registries.
Only publicly available registration numbers of legal entities will be published. Natural persons remain explicitly out of scope.
Please let me know your feedback. Questions and comments are welcome.
Regards Marco Schmidt Manager Registration Services RIPE NCC
----- To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, please visit:https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/db-wg.ripe.net/ As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the email matching your subscription before you can change your settings. More details at:https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/
To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, please visit:https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/db-wg.ripe.net/ As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the email matching your subscription before you can change your settings. More details at:https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/ --
*С уважением, Мусин Александр* alexmusin@contell.ru +7 (495) 481-25-30 +7 (800) 775-04-23 г. Москва, ул. Научный пр., дом 20, стр. 2 www.contell.ru <https://contell.ru>
Hey Alexander, Do you mean that this registration number field would not be useful for governments or that there are certain governments (I can imagine there being a offshore tax haven that doesn't necessarily have particularly good company identification numbers) don't have company identifiers, and that may cause scammers to create org's in that location? Assuming the latter, even if there is a government that does not have a particularly good company identification system, I still think there is significant value in having the number for most other countries available, as this would greatly speed up certain customer provisioning/verification activities. Regards Ben On Mon, 17 Nov 2025 at 16:24, Александр Мусин <am@contell.ru> wrote:
Hello,
This info is very sesible, but for goverments there are no additional information, but many scammers will find this info very useful.
I'm very against this idea.
17.11.2025 19:15, Ben Cartwright-Cox via db-wg пишет:
Hey Marco,
I would find this proposal particularly useful for things like KYC and sanctions screening.
So a +1 from me, having this added would be a nice quality of life improvement
On Mon, 17 Nov 2025 at 11:01, Marco Schmidt <mschmidt@ripe.net> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
Following my presentation at the RIPE 91 Address Policy Working Group session, I’d like to propose adding a company registration number to the organisation object type.
Problem Statement: The RIPE Database should allow users to uniquely identify Internet Number Resource holders. Today, organisation objects linked to RIPE NCC co-maintained inetnum, inet6num, and aut-num objects include the validated legal organisation name and country code where the resource holder is legally registered. However, these attributes alone are not always sufficient to uniquely identify a legal entity, for three main reasons:
1. Identical names: In some jurisdictions, different companies can legally register with the same or very similar names. 2. Transliteration issues: In countries using non-Latin scripts, converting names from and into Latin characters can produce inconsistent or inaccurate results. 3. Data discrepancies: Differences between the validated legal information (org-name and country) and the contact details maintained by the resource holder (for example, a postal address in another country) can create confusion and make identification more difficult.
Solution Definition: Introduce a new reg-nr: attribute for RIPE NCC co-maintained organisation objects, containing verified company registration numbers issued by national authorities. The RIPE NCC already holds this information for ~99% of resource holders that are legal entities.
Publishing a unique and verifiable registration number will significantly improve the ability of RIPE Database users to accurately identify resource holders and cross-check them in national company registries.
Only publicly available registration numbers of legal entities will be published. Natural persons remain explicitly out of scope.
Please let me know your feedback. Questions and comments are welcome.
Regards Marco Schmidt Manager Registration Services RIPE NCC
----- To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, please visit: https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/db-wg.ripe.net/ As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the email matching your subscription before you can change your settings. More details at: https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/
----- To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, please visit: https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/db-wg.ripe.net/ As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the email matching your subscription before you can change your settings. More details at: https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/
--
С уважением, Мусин Александр
alexmusin@contell.ru +7 (495) 481-25-30 +7 (800) 775-04-23 г. Москва, ул. Научный пр., дом 20, стр. 2 www.contell.ru
----- To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, please visit: https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/db-wg.ripe.net/ As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the email matching your subscription before you can change your settings. More details at: https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/
Hey Ben, All governments can find organization with their tax registration number or so, but there is many other ways to identification of IP users/owners in their country. In my opinion that for clear information there will be more useful some interaction RIPE with governments officials to provide this information, not make it public. 17.11.2025 19:32, Ben Cartwright-Cox via db-wg пишет:
Hey Alexander,
Do you mean that this registration number field would not be useful for governments or that there are certain governments (I can imagine there being a offshore tax haven that doesn't necessarily have particularly good company identification numbers) don't have company identifiers, and that may cause scammers to create org's in that location?
Assuming the latter, even if there is a government that does not have a particularly good company identification system, I still think there is significant value in having the number for most other countries available, as this would greatly speed up certain customer provisioning/verification activities.
Regards Ben
On Mon, 17 Nov 2025 at 16:24, Александр Мусин<am@contell.ru> wrote:
Hello,
This info is very sesible, but for goverments there are no additional information, but many scammers will find this info very useful.
I'm very against this idea.
17.11.2025 19:15, Ben Cartwright-Cox via db-wg пишет:
Hey Marco,
I would find this proposal particularly useful for things like KYC and sanctions screening.
So a +1 from me, having this added would be a nice quality of life improvement
On Mon, 17 Nov 2025 at 11:01, Marco Schmidt<mschmidt@ripe.net> wrote:
Dear colleagues,
Following my presentation at the RIPE 91 Address Policy Working Group session, I’d like to propose adding a company registration number to the organisation object type.
Problem Statement: The RIPE Database should allow users to uniquely identify Internet Number Resource holders. Today, organisation objects linked to RIPE NCC co-maintained inetnum, inet6num, and aut-num objects include the validated legal organisation name and country code where the resource holder is legally registered. However, these attributes alone are not always sufficient to uniquely identify a legal entity, for three main reasons:
1. Identical names: In some jurisdictions, different companies can legally register with the same or very similar names. 2. Transliteration issues: In countries using non-Latin scripts, converting names from and into Latin characters can produce inconsistent or inaccurate results. 3. Data discrepancies: Differences between the validated legal information (org-name and country) and the contact details maintained by the resource holder (for example, a postal address in another country) can create confusion and make identification more difficult.
Solution Definition: Introduce a new reg-nr: attribute for RIPE NCC co-maintained organisation objects, containing verified company registration numbers issued by national authorities. The RIPE NCC already holds this information for ~99% of resource holders that are legal entities.
Publishing a unique and verifiable registration number will significantly improve the ability of RIPE Database users to accurately identify resource holders and cross-check them in national company registries.
Only publicly available registration numbers of legal entities will be published. Natural persons remain explicitly out of scope.
Please let me know your feedback. Questions and comments are welcome.
Regards Marco Schmidt Manager Registration Services RIPE NCC
----- To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, please visit:https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/db-wg.ripe.net/ As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the email matching your subscription before you can change your settings. More details at:https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/
----- To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, please visit:https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/db-wg.ripe.net/ As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the email matching your subscription before you can change your settings. More details at:https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/
--
С уважением, Мусин Александр
alexmusin@contell.ru +7 (495) 481-25-30 +7 (800) 775-04-23 г. Москва, ул. Научный пр., дом 20, стр. 2 www.contell.ru
----- To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, please visit:https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/db-wg.ripe.net/ As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the email matching your subscription before you can change your settings. More details at:https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/
To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, please visit:https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/db-wg.ripe.net/ As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the email matching your subscription before you can change your settings. More details at:https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/ --
Hello, On Mon, 2025-11-17 at 12:01 +0100, Marco Schmidt wrote:
(...) Only publicly available registration numbers of legal entities will be published. Natural persons remain explicitly out of scope.
Please let me know your feedback. Questions and comments are welcome.
On the big picture, I think this is a reasonable idea. However, there are so many registration authorities over all the RIPE service region, that it seems quite a cosmetic measure to me. Additionnaly: Some legal entities do not have registration number (some non-for-profit organizations, in France, for example, have one, some do not have any). I am unsure that having to make it publicly available (and maintained over time) would be simplifying stuffs for the database's maintainers (LIRs, end-users, or NCC). Regards, Clément Cavadore
participants (13)
-
Alex Musin -
Ben Cartwright-Cox -
Clement Cavadore -
Edward Shryane -
George Michaelson -
Gert Doering -
Jeroen Massar -
Leo Vegoda -
Marco Schmidt -
Nick Hilliard -
Sasha Romijn -
Sergey Myasoedov -
Александр Мусин