Re: [dp-tf] Quadlogy of person proposals
-
To: Leo Vegoda <>
-
From: "Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet" <>
-
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 12:04:30 +0000
-
Cc: Denis Walker <>,
-
Organization: UniVie - ACOnet
-
Reply-to:
Leo Vegoda wrote:
> On 15 Jun 2007, at 4:26pm, Denis Walker wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> This is why I think we should focus attention first of all on these
>> questions. But I don't think this is a simple as it looks. Maybe the
>> original wording of policies said we need contact information for
>> troubleshooting. The world has moved on a lot since then. Now
>> accountability is also important. Governments and LEAs want to know
>> "who" is responsible for Internet resources.
>
>
> I agree.
>
>> A faceless role object will
>> not be good enough.
>
>
> I doubt person objects would be, either. That's what organisation
> objects, do.
Maybe, but in many cases it would simply shift the problem from the left
hand to the right hand. Take my case at home:
I have been assigned 8 addresses for my ADSL connection by my Telekom Op.
With your approach I could easily hide my personal contact information
because that can/has to go into "my" organisation: object. In the end it
is the same set of (personal) information under a different heading.
If that approach gets us out from unerneath the PD rules, fine with me :-)
But I am not convinced...
> Regards,
>
>--
>Leo Vegoda
>IANA Numbers Liaison
Wilfried.
|