Hello,
Thank you all very much for the feedback. I would like to provide a few
clarifications that address the questions and concerns raised and the
support expressed.
The aim of this proposal is in line with the core purpose of the RIPE
Database to enable effective contact between database users (including
network operators) and supporting incident response. As Andrejs rightly
noted, this is the foundation on which the database was built. However,
the environment in which it operates has changed significantly over the
past 30+ years. We now have more than 40,000 resource holders from all
industries, spread across the entire world. This diversity regularly
leads to confusion about who the actual resource holder is. Something
the RIPE NCC sees every day when people contact us because they cannot
determine the correct point of contact.
Publishing the publicly available company registration number for legal
entities would help users identify the correct organisation more
reliably (and reduce unnecessary workload for the RIPE NCC). This
wouldn't turn the RIPE Database into a business registry, a KYC system,
or a tool for legal verification. Those roles remain with national
registries. The database would simply provide the pointer that allows
users to check the appropriate official registry themselves. In this
sense, the proposal enhances the operational purpose of the RIPE Database.
Regarding the concerns about security and operational risk, as noted
before the full validated legal name of every resource holder is already
published today. For many organisations, this is enough to identify
them. Actors with malicious intentions typically rely on a broader
toolkit rather than solely on the RIPE Database to identify their
target. Publishing a registration number would not increase their
capabilities. However, it does offer significant benefits to the many
users who are less familiar with the registry system and often struggle
to identify the correct resource holder, especially in cases of
identical or very similar organisation names, or difficulties caused by
transliteration. This improves both communication and incident response,
as it helps ensure that reports reach the correct resource holder rather
than an uninvolved third party with a similar name.
As Clément mentioned, there are indeed some rare, special types of legal
entities that do not have publicly available registration numbers, but
the vast majority do. For natural persons, no registration number would
be published, and nothing changes for them.
I hope this provides clearer context for the motivation and addresses
the concerns raised so far. I look forward to continuing the discussion.
Kind regards,
Marco Schmidt
RIPE NCC
On 17/11/2025 17:20, Clement Cavadore wrote:
Hello,
On Mon, 2025-11-17 at 12:01 +0100, Marco Schmidt wrote:
(...)
Only publicly available registration numbers of legal entities will
be published. Natural persons remain explicitly out of scope.
Please let me know your feedback. Questions and comments are welcome.
On the big picture, I think this is a reasonable idea.
However, there are so many registration authorities over all the RIPE
service region, that it seems quite a cosmetic measure to me.
Additionnaly: Some legal entities do not have registration number
(some non-for-profit organizations, in France, for example, have one,
some do not have any).
I am unsure that having to make it publicly available (and maintained
over time) would be simplifying stuffs for the database's maintainers
(LIRs, end-users, or NCC).
Regards,
Clément Cavadore
-----
To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options,
please visit: https://mailman.ripe.net/mailman3/lists/db-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/
