RE: [ietf-provreg] provreg wg responses to IESG comments

[Rick Wesson <wessorh@ar.com>]

I understand your position on the core protocol, however we only have one
use of the core protocol -- domains. We also loose nothing by removing the
language but loose a lot by retaining it.

lets drop the marketing language.

thanks,

-rick



On Wed, 30 Apr 2003, Hollenbeck, Scott wrote:

> Rick,
>
> Remember that the DCP is included in the core protocol, so the features
> included have to address use scenarios that go beyond the domain name world.
> I can easily envision situations where the potential for marketing contact
> exists when provisioning objects other than domain names, so I believe the
> text should remain as-is -- even if it won't necessarily apply to domain
> name provisioning.
>
> -Scott-
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rick Wesson [mailto:wessorh@ar.com]
> > Sent: Monday, April 28, 2003 4:30 PM
> > To: Edward Lewis
> > Cc: iesg-secretary@ietf.org; hardie@qualcomm.com; jaap@sidn.nl;
> > ietf-provreg@cafax.se
> > Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] provreg wg responses to IESG comments
> >
> >
> >
> > wow, its amazing that this process works sometimes, ant to
> > all those that
> > have worked on the documents, and especially scott, a hearty
> > thank you.
> >
> > i do still have one issue with the language "for marketing purposes"
> >
> > I know of no AUP under any TLD that allows a contact to be
> > used for ANY
> > marketing purpose, and as suck I request this language be changed to
> >
> > <contact/>: Contact information not restricted by contact,
> > though other
> > AUP may apply.
> >
> > also specificly strike "for the promotion of a product or service."
> >
> > no registry has ever allowed this and most specificly prevent
> > such, this
> > doesn't be long in an RFC.
> >
> > I know all the above was unintentional and i'm sure once you
> > think about
> > it you'll agree too.
> >
> >
> > best,
> >
> > -rick
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 28 Apr 2003, Edward Lewis wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > 2. Within the optional dcp (data collection policy)
> > element: there is a
> > > non-technical spin in at least the following label
> > definition, what kind of
> > > marketing is meant?
> > >
> > >    <contact/>: Contact for marketing purposes.
> > >
> > > Please add more to this definition so that is more neutral in in its
> > > terminology.
> > >
> > > RESOLUTION: The description of this element has been
> > changed as follows:
> > >
> > > "<contact/>: Contact for marketing purposes.  Information
> > can be used to
> > > contact individuals, through a communications channel other than the
> > > protocol, for the promotion of a product or service.".
> > >
> >
>