Re: [dow1tf] Against a Whois "White List"

["Milton Mueller" <mueller@xxxxxxx>]

>>> "David Fares" <dfares@xxxxxxxxx> 05/10/04 16:13 $)GD6E) >>>

>On another different but related point, in reviewing >our draft, I
believe 
>that we should refrain from attempting to define >sensitive and non-
>sensitive data, since that is within the mandate of >TF 2.

I cannot agree with that, unfortunately.
TF 2 is actually NOT about defining sensitive 
and non-sensitive per se, but about which 
data elements should be COLLECTED and which 
should not. 

TFI have discovered that their deliberations 
are clarified significantly, by separating, for purposes of discussion,
which of the existing
data elements will be publicly displayed
and which will not. The current report 
explains this well. The reason we MUST do it
is because it makes no sense to talk about how
port 43 or other datamining resitrctions should
be made unless we know what is publicly accessible.

In general, it will greatly advance the work
of the GNSO Council if the TFs all come in with
relatively consistent ideas about what 
constitutes sensitive and non-sensitive data.
If we don't, then the whole debate will have to
be had once again at the Council level.