To:
"'Bill Manning'" <bmanning@isi.edu>
Cc:
ietf-provreg@cafax.se
From:
"Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
Date:
Fri, 16 Feb 2001 10:32:06 -0500
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject:
RE: grrp-reqs-06, 11. Security Considerations [3]
Bill, Have a read of the definitions section ("Thick Registry" specifically), where it describes "technical information" as "information needed to produce zone files". <Scott/> -----Original Message----- From: Bill Manning [mailto:bmanning@ISI.EDU] Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 10:27 AM To: shollenbeck@verisign.com Cc: ietf-provreg@cafax.se Subject: Re: grrp-reqs-06, 11. Security Considerations [3] % % Eric, % % The intention of requirement 11-[3] isn't to document that "a mechanism % exists to to distinguish technical from social information", it's intended % to note that disclosure of non-technical information may be subject to % restrictions and the protocol needs to provide a way to identify information % that is subject to disclosure restrictions. This was added at the request % of Karl Auerbach. What is the distinction between "technical" and "non-technical"? Are these definitions immutatble within/between juristictions? Will they withstand legal review? In which venues? --bill