In message <[email protected]>, Gert Doering <[email protected]> wrote:
>Leo has been around about as long as I have - and his understanding of >the reasoning matches mine. Excellent! All three of us have the exact same shared understanding, it seems. >Let me illustrate this a bit: "back in the days", ISPs were given IPv4 >allocations based on network deployment *plans*. Like "we intend to >expand to neighbouring country <x>, cities <a>, <b> and <c>, and >we expect to have <z-1000> customers there by mid next year" Right. This is what I have termed "sensitive" and/or "competitive" information in my immediately prior post. And I am 100% supportive of the notion that all such "sensitive" information should at all times be held in the strictest confidence by NCC, even regardless of whether such confidentiality has been formalized or not. (It just makes good sense.) As you will see from my immediately prior post however I am of the opinion that there is a clear and bright line between THAT sort of "sensitive" information (which might be used, misused, or abused if it were to fall into the hands of some business competitor) and the mere national corporate registration document which all prospective new members that are not natural persons must provide to NCC prior to even being accepted as new members. There is no question in my mind that the former category of information MUST be held in confidence by RIPE NCC. The latter category, maybe not so much. Regards, rfg
