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