To:
"Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
Cc:
"'Edward Lewis'" <edlewis@arin.net>, ietf-provreg@cafax.se
From:
Joe Abley <jabley@isc.org>
Date:
Wed, 8 Jan 2003 11:15:22 -0500
In-Reply-To:
<3CD14E451751BD42BA48AAA50B07BAD6033704BB@vsvapostal3.prod.netsol.com>
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: privacy
On Wednesday, Jan 8, 2003, at 07:17 Canada/Eastern, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote: >> The crux of the issue is, there are situations in which a registrar >> may wish to alter the default privacy considerations for data when >> interacting with a registry. Not all registrar-registry environments >> will need this flexibility, but there is a claim that some exist. (I >> have no personal, first-hand knowledge of any such environments.) >> >> How can we accomodate such environments? That is the basic question. > > FWIW the attribute-based proposal is the one most closely aligned with > "standard" XML practice, if such a thing exists. XML attributes are > typically used to describe the data contained within an element, and > that's > what's being proposed. Would it be possible to hear the set of requirements to which the attribute solution forms an acceptable solution? I suspect that the requirements need work (or at least they need input based on real-life registry policy, as opposed to policy assumed by the IESG). As Rick mentioned, if the IESG could raise their concerns on this list it would be a lot easier to understand where they are coming from. Joe