Serge,
Serge Droz via Security-wg wrote on 02/08/2026 13:12:
In the day and age of cloud services there are hundreds of examples of
services provided to different jurisdictions. Usually the law of your
legal residence applies.
yep, that's largely where the abuse management needs to happen.
Furthermore, APnic and Lacnic do such things, and they cover multiple
jurisdictions,a fact you seem to ignore.
This argument is looking perilously close to suggesting that the RIPE
NCC should throw the outcome of its own PDP into the bin and follow the
other RIRs willy-nilly.
And your cutlery vendor analogy doesn't cut it: Once the knife is sold,
the vendor doesn't control it anymore. That is different from ip addresses.
Yep, this is why I flagged it as an inapplicable comparison, in a
similar way to the bank manager comparison: once the asset goes out the
door, you lose control.
But you've brought up the nub of the issue here: you're viewing
continued number registration as a lever which can be used to exert
control over the resource holder in a way that ticks some boxes for you.
There are a lot of reasons why this approach doesn't make good policy.
Nick
-----
To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options,
please visit: https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/security-wg.ripe.net/
As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the email matching your subscription before you can change your settings.
More details at: https://www.ripe.net/membership/mail/mailman-3-migration/
