Summary

  • RIPE NCC's new Privacy Statement Section 2.5 says registration and allocation records are retained while a resource is registered and after it is returned or transferred. It sets no fixed terminal date for that history.
  • The clause gives a typical seven-year period for financial and administrative records under Dutch tax law, then uses separate registry, dispute, legal and security criteria for other data. The Board approved adding the section in September.

An address block changes hands; the old file does not vanish. RIPE NCC's Privacy Statement now puts that fact in a dedicated retention clause. Section 2.5 says the register must be able to show the chain of custody of Internet number resources over time. Registration and allocation records therefore remain while a resource is registered and after it is returned or transferred. A new holder receives an address; the register keeps the path by which it arrived.

The September Board minutes identify the change. RIPE NCC's legal officer presented Section 2.5 as a way to explain how retention periods are determined, and the Board approved the amended Privacy Statement unanimously. It is an explanation of the registry's criteria, not a newly reported deletion event. The public text gives no number of years after a transfer at which the historical registration trail expires.

The same section shows what a fixed clock looks like. For financial and administrative records under Dutch tax law, it gives a typical general example of seven years. For resource history, it names a function instead: historically verifiable registration, the ability to resolve disputes over a registration, and the ability to establish or defend legal claims. Security, fraud, resource hijacking and abuse are further considerations. A tax-record clock cannot be borrowed to describe the address file.

The clause reaches other kinds of personal data, too. Mailing-list archives and event-attendee lists can remain while they serve open policy discussion, subject to a request for removal. A member, End User, contact person or event participant also has a service-relationship period to consider. Those are different records with different reasons for retention, collected under one Privacy Statement. RIPE NCC says it regularly reviews what it holds and deletes or anonymises personal data when none of the stated grounds still applies. Anyone wanting the period for their own situation can ask the registry.

That leaves a precise accountability question. The new text tells a former resource holder why an old allocation entry can survive the transfer. It does not publish a data-class schedule showing which personal fields remain in the historical chain, or an example of a field removed once its purpose ended. Such a schedule would let members see where a verifiable resource history stops requiring a person's details. Until then, the decision sits with the institution that both keeps the registry and judges the continuing need for its archive.

Sources