Subject: [Ietf-not43] Suggestions of changes to the requirements docum ent

From: [email-masked] (Hollenbeck, Scott)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 08:44:53 -0500

> The IESG froze the progress of the EPP protocol documents to the RFC
> level because of privacy concerns (the lack of a standard way to
> express privacy preferences for the registrant).

Not quite true.  The IESG sent back a review comment that the WG has yet to
reach consensus on.  Once the WG gets its act together, the IESG will likely
approve the documents.  This is very different than the IESG putting a stop
to the effort.

-Scott-

---

From: [email-masked] (Vittorio Bertola)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 15:04:07 +0100

>approve the documents.  This is very different than the IESG putting a stop

Anyway, it seems to me that given the request by the IESG for proper
privacy addressing in the provisioning protocol, a similar objection
is likely to be raised if this protocol does not do the same. IMHO,
this is one more reason to add some privacy-related provision to the
crisp requirements too.

Moreover, implementing privacy on this side of the system is easier,
because independently from the complexity of the choices and
algorithms that may be applied during provisioning and retrieval to
determine the level of privacy of the value, from the point of view of
answering queries, either the value is private in regard to the
query's authentication level or it is not - so a binary value might be
enough after all.
-- 
vb.                  [Vittorio Bertola - vb [at] bertola.eu.org]<---
-------------------> http://bertola.eu.org/ <-----------------------

---

From: [email-masked] (Eric A. Hall)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 11:20:35 -0600

> Moreover, implementing privacy on this side of the system is easier,

There is nothing to be gained from doing so.

> query's authentication level or it is not - so a binary value might be

Privacy requirements vary by jurisdiction. Any data which may be returned
has to be presumed as being allowed by the jurisdiction under which that
server operates. Adding bits and widgets to the protocol or data will not
affect this.

If some greater level of privacy is desired, users can register with a
provider who offers it, or can attempt to change the privacy rules for the
governing jurisdiction of their preferred registry. Adding bits and
widgets to the protocol or data will not affect this, either.

-- 
Eric A. Hall                                        http://www.ehsco.com/
Internet Core Protocols          http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/