To:
Ed Allen Smith <easmith@beatrice.rutgers.edu>
CC:
ietf-provreg@cafax.se
From:
Andrew Newton <anewton@ecotroph.net>
Date:
Fri, 18 Apr 2003 11:07:27 -0400
In-Reply-To:
<mid+200304172243.h3HMhoOg015130@cesario.rutgers.edu>
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
User-Agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2) Gecko/20021202
Subject:
Re: [ietf-provreg] legal entity vs individual person
Ed Allen Smith wrote: >>Instead of flag being true or false, it is an enumerated type with the >>following allowable values: >> ok to disclose >> do not disclose >> do not disclose because this is personal data > > > Should attempting to use the last for a DNS server's IP address (at least > for IPv4) be considered a syntax error? And what's the default state (I > suggest _one_ of the above be the default for _all_, to remove disputes over > "should this default on or off" and people _forgetting_ in programming, > etcetera whether things default on or off...)? Scott's wording said this was about contact attributes (if I've got this wrong Scott, please correct me). So I would think applying any of this to an IP address is a syntax error. I also made the assumption that the <contact:disclose> element would only be sent when the value of the 'flag' attribute would be something other than the default disclosure policy. Regardless of the number of states, this might need to be clearer. -andy