Hi, On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 07:35:28PM -0800, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:
Ignoring the legal non-issue of squatting, there is still the possibility of prosecutable fraud.
I just realized that this raises yet another question...
In the case of the contracts that RIPE enters into with parties that request AS number assignments, do these contracts routinely include any clause or provision which legally binds the entity in question to only announce routes to IP space which has been formally registered to that entity, or to one of that entity's customers, by one of the Regional Internet Registries, i.e. ARIN, RIPE, APNIC, LACNIC, or AFRINIC?
If not, why not?
These are valid questions. I think the main reason is history and decoupling between "resource management" (= handing out AS numbers, and having a contract that primarily ensures we know where they go to) and "operations" (= what people actually *do* with these AS numbers, and whether we like it or not). Need to think more about this and talk to people and see whether this can be done (legal framework) and how our policies would be to get there (formal policy proposal in anti-abuse?). OTOH, the existing contracts people need to sign *do* contain clauses that resource holders will abide "all RIPE policies" (or such), so the contracts in place could be good enough if the policies are made clear... as always, there's legitimate cases which we don't know about, so policy texting is never easy. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279