Re: [ietf-provreg] the privacy problem statement

[Edward Lewis <edlewis@arin.net>]

Randy,

While the group is preparing to address the comment below, this 
statement was made.  I think we need a little more clarification 
(hopefully not much) from you on this.

In the 'official' comment, you mentioned 'domain.'   Is there 
specific data you had in mind when writing the comment?

At 11:43 -0500 4/2/03, janusz sienkiewicz wrote:
>Edward Lewis wrote:
>
>>  At 7:38 -0500 4/1/03, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:
>>  >Absent anything that resembles social data (as described in RFC 3375)
>>  >outside the contact mapping, I'm working with a definition of social data
>>  >that only applies to elements present in the contact mapping.
>>
>>  In the IESG comment, "why do domain/contact/.. not have granular
>>  information about privacy?" domains are mentioned too.
>>
>
>Domains don't have any social data (<domain:registrant>, <domain:contact> are
>just references to social data owned and maintained by registrars). That's
>why domains should not be within the scope of any privacy mechanism.

-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                            +1-703-227-9854
ARIN Research Engineer

I've had it with world domination.  The maintenance fees are too high.