[cooperation-wg] Data Retention Directive considered harmful
- Previous message (by thread): [cooperation-wg] Data Retention Directive considered harmful
- Next message (by thread): [cooperation-wg] Data Retention Directive considered harmful
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
mariann unterluggauer
mariann at nomatic.org
Tue Apr 8 18:25:30 CEST 2014
hi, patrik thanks! and in case of the "dreams aka visions" of jim and gordon: i would add "must delete", applied to all levels. stored as well as requested data. i mean, i am still able to go to a eu forensic institute today to see pictures of alphonse bertillon. yet, in the 19th century they had a sort of "must delete" law in place, which only was fulfilled in regard to sloppiness in the archive - - - or fire. mariann On Apr 8, 2014, at 5:18 PM, Jim Reid <jim at rfc1035.com> wrote: > On 8 Apr 2014, at 15:17, Gordon Lennox <gordon.lennox.13 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> On the bright side it could make implementing carrier-grade NATs so much more fun. > > Or perhaps it'll be the tipping point for carriers to deploy IPv6. :-) Says he both ducking for cover and running away... > > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 842 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/cooperation-wg/attachments/20140408/09f524bb/attachment.sig>
- Previous message (by thread): [cooperation-wg] Data Retention Directive considered harmful
- Next message (by thread): [cooperation-wg] Data Retention Directive considered harmful
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]