To:
paf@cisco.com, Ted Hardie <hardie@qualcomm.com>, Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>, randy@psg.com
Cc:
ietf-provreg@cafax.se, shollenbeck@verisign.com
From:
Edward Lewis <edlewis@arin.net>
Date:
Mon, 10 Mar 2003 08:08:29 -0800
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject:
[ietf-provreg] provreg's privacy issue
In response to the IESG comment:
why do domain/contact/.. not have granular information about privacy?
The provreg WG has apparently reached consensus upon this suggestion:
That being the case, my preference would be to put _all_ of the DNP
syntax and semantics into an extension (where the problem can be
addressed as a whole) while making the existing DCP element mandatory
if that resolves the privacy issue with the IESG.
For the WG, Scott Hollenbeck will make the necessary changes to the
base specification to reflect this consensus. (Scott: please do this
as soon as you get the chance.[0]) It would help the IESG to see the
formalized text based on this.
Returning to the IESG review of these documents sometime around
October, we feel that we have addressed all of the comments now. As
soon as the new documents hit the repository, we ask that the IESG
resume its review of the specifications.
[0] Yeah, I realize that drafts submissions are being held up until
after the IETF meeting week.
--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis +1-703-227-9854
ARIN Research Engineer