Gert,
On 8/1/2026, at 18:45, Gert Doering <gert@space.net> wrote:
On 7/31/2026, at 16:41, Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote: The issue we have in the RIPE security wg, and before that, abuse-wg and anti-spam-wg, is that the solutions being proposed involves changing the nature of the RIPE NCC from a registry into an quasi-judicial and enforcement body. Essentially the arguments are of the form which could waspily be described as "politicians' logic":
Technically, we crossed this line when we introduced not just the company names, but also their registration numbers into the RIPE Database. NWI-21.
This very much sounds like a thing a registry would do, like, register numbers and document who has them, in an unambiguous way? So which line exactly was crossed by publishing more unambiguous holder info, for legal entities?
Not all of the data collected by the registry should be published. Publishing an "official" identifier is a significant step to future steps towards technical and/or political restrictions based on the registry data. -- Best, Sergey