On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 10:49:20AM -0400, Stephen Kent wrote: > At 6:35 AM -0700 8/9/07, Bill Manning wrote: > >... > > > The RIRs are working to enable clean transfer of address space > >> holdings, using X.509 certs. While one could do what what Harald > >> suggested, the new address space holder would have to worry about HP > >> revoking the cert it issued to effect the transfer. A "cleaner" model > >> would call for HP to effect the transfer through a registry, so that > >> HP is no longer in the cert path. > > > > > > and they would then not have to worry about the RIR revoking the > > cert? > > > >--bill > > The RIRs are recognized as neutral, primary address space allocators > who have contractual relationships with the folks to whom they > allocate addresses. I think it might be more attractive to the new > holder of address space to have a relationship with an RIR vs. the > former address space holder, a company that might be acquired by > another company, change business orientation, declare bankruptcy, ... "...are recognsied..." - by whom? "... I think..." - may not be a shared point of view. One might assume that when GE issues certs for subnets of its address space, that a contractual relationship would exist. And I am pretty sure that GE has been around for quite a few years longer than all the RIR's combined. RIR's are legal entities, just like other companies... and are subject to the same problems that companies have, e.g. aquired, changed orientation, bankruptcy... etc. They are NOT special. > > Steve > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf -- --bill Opinions expressed may not even be mine by the time you read them, and certainly don't reflect those of any other entity (legal or otherwise). _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf