<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [registrars] Draft terms of reference for task force to review data collected and data displayed
- To: "Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [registrars] Draft terms of reference for task force to review data collected and data displayed
- From: Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine <brunner@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 10:35:34 -0400
- Cc: registrars@xxxxxxxx, brunner@xxxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: Message from "Bruce Tonkin" <Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au> of "Fri, 19 Sep 2003 16:44:16 +1000." <AFEF39657AEEC34193C494DBD7179222011426B6@phoenix.mit>
- Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Bruce,
Re: Title: Review data collected and data displayed
The description of the task force text only identifies the holder as a party
with an interest in privacy (aka "data protection"). It can also identify as
parties with an interest national data protection authorities, domain name
provisioning operators, domain name service publishing operators, network
access providers, and application service providers.
I like the fact that the purpose is explicit, and contract specific.
I don't see anything to suggest altering in the In-scope section.
Ditto for the Out-of-scope section.
Under Tasks/Milestones I suggest a review of both the IESG and my P3P-esque
proposal to the PROVREG WG, and a review of P3P.
Re: Title: Restricting bulk access to WHOIS data for marketing purposes
I agree with Tim Ruiz's comment on the second sentence of para 2 in the
In-scope section.
I do not presume that the IETF CRISP WG will conclude with an implementable
protocol specification, nor that any such work product must be applicable
to this problem domain. I suggest deletion of the second and third sentences
of para 2 in the Out-of-scope section.
Cheers,
Eric
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|