On 05/02/2013 23:33, Randy Bush wrote:
mornin' nick,
btw, the approach of hiding behind an lir is somewhat interesting.
for an r&e institution, such a janet or nordunet member, the reliability of the information about the end user may be strong enough to allow the ncc to be comfortable.
in the non-r&e space, it would seem to be just creating more of the same problem we have with PI space. 'hiding' behind an lir would be too much hiding and not enough lir.
actually if there were some non-discriminatory way of doing this, I wouldn't be averse to the idea - this is a helpful side-effect of the new level-field charging mechanism. Problem is, however much the R&E organisations tend to be decent, honest and upstanding members of the Internet community, I don't see how it would be feasible to implement this without being unfair to the non R&E resource holders. Level playing fields are important as a policy goal.
as you can see, most of the authors of 2012-7 are r&e folk, and much of the legacy resources holdings in the region are r&e.
Most of the legacy resources still in use are R&E, but a substantial chunk of the squatted / abandoned space was never R&E to start with. The issues that I have with the current proposal relate to how it will handle these problem address blocks. Nick