[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


To: "'Rick H Wesson'" <wessorh@ar.com>
Cc: "'ietf-provreg@cafax.se'" <ietf-provreg@cafax.se>
From: "Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 12:37:31 -0500
Sender: owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject: RE: <info> Command and authInfo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rick H Wesson [mailto:wessorh@ar.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 12:24 PM
> To: Hollenbeck, Scott
> Cc: 'ietf-provreg@cafax.se'
> Subject: Re: <info> Command and authInfo
> 
> 
> 
> please don't turn this spec into VeriSigns view of a Domain Registry. Up
> till now you have done a good job of engineering but it seems as though
> your employer is creeping into your work.

Rick, I really object to any insinuation that there's any employer bias
creeping into anything here.  My comments on RRP were provided to document
experience with a similar protocol.  Data mining is a real issue, and the
current EPP spec has said for a LONG time about the way the info command
should be implemented -- and it's NOT what you suggested ("the status
command should be open to all registrars").  Instead of an ad-hominem
attack, why not address the data mining risk and merit or detriment of the
change proposal?

-Scott-

Home | Date list | Subject list