Re: [ietf-provreg] FYI: EPP implementation by the Polish registry

[Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine <brunner@nic-naa.net>]

> The latter case - "newbie" is rather derogatory term.

From <5nkf2vc69aamt50qla76umk9cscpun42ev@4ax.com> 

> I am a newbie of this group and of the IETF WGs in general (please
> pardon me for anything inappropriate I might unvoluntarily do).
> However, I have been discussing DNS privacy issues extensively in the
> last years, so please allow me to give my point of view on the ongoing
> privacy discussion.

Note.

> Not addressing the privacy issue in the base protocol would likely
> imply that the service would often be deployed in real life without
> any means to achieve privacy protection.

Agree.

>                                           Unfortunately, the present
> lack of privacy protection in the WHOIS system is plainly illegal in
> many countries, and I don't think it's reasonable to think that this
> situation can go on for long without actual lawsuits starting to
> happen, both towards ccTLD and gTLD registries and registrars. 

Not relevant for a provisioning protocol. Specific to a particular
post-provisioned publication protocol, and none of us should be playing
lawyer on the net.


Its mechanism, mechanism, mechanism, mechanism, mechanism, mechanism and
once more for emphesis, mechanism.

Now I'll go back to my screw driver and duct tape, cause three years
working http-state, onward-transport, and provisioning just haven't
left me with clue parity with jrandom Euros.

I'll send a write up of where we are to the P3P list, we (I've now got
a spiffy "P3P hat" on) have a meeting this Friday. At this point though,
it looks as if the W3C is going one way, and the IETF is going another.
XML on the one hand, and a binary token on the other.

Eric