Re: apnic - second day better

[Geoff Huston <gih@telstra.net>]

At 11:46 AM 21/08/2003 +0900, Randy Bush wrote:
> > If the RIRs manage to drive home the idea that you only have "legal" right
> > to address space if you've got an ongoing relationship with an RIR, and
> > that we (for some sense of "we") don't have to care about those with
> > address space the RIRs have no idea who "owns", the idea of trusting the
> > RIRs and only the RIRs to say "what address block belongs to which 
> user" is
> > more viable. If huge chunks of "important" address space aren't in the
> > RIRs' lists of "authorized owners", one has to trust more sources of such
> > info.
>
> some would like this, i.e. they do not see the rirs as the
> authoritative source for ownership of historical space.
> (personally, i am ambivalent)
>
> also note that paul made very clear (took me two tries:-) that the
> rir will continue to change whois date even if the recipient is not
> a member.  this is not to say that they will issue attestation of
> ownership.

It is my understanding that it would be of no value to issue an attestation
of an association between an entity identity and an address resource if
the attestor (is that a word?) has no means of validating such a attestation.
Accordingly if the attestation is simply an assertion without reference to
supportive documentation and records, then its of no useable value
as far as I can tell.

  regards,

   Geoff