Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and ENUM deployment
Richard Shockey <richard@shockey.us> Thu, 12 August 2004 00:49 UTC
From: Richard Shockey <richard@shockey.us>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 20:49:24 -0400
To: Jim Reid <"jseng at pobox.org.sg">
Subject: Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and ENUM deployment
In-Reply-To: <10579.1092246833@gromit.rfc1035.com>
Message-ID: <6.1.0.6.2.20040811203003.04514bb8@joy.songbird.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Status: R
At 01:53 PM 8/11/2004, Jim Reid wrote: >>>>> "James" == James Seng <jseng at pobox.org.sg> writes: James> Privacy or not, proposed by Kim adds no additional James> technical value beyond restriction what people can put into James> their own sip boxes and enum records. This discussion is a dialogue of the deaf and it would be better if it terminated now as it's just going in circles. James, there are serious privacy and data protection issues surrounding ENUM. They may not be a concern in Singapore. But they are a concern in the EU. And probably elsewhere too. These issues could also touch on competition policy too: for instance when a telco/ISP controls an end-user's NAPTRs. Much of this stuff touches on legal issues that are far out of scope for IETF. While I would like to see someone write up a draft on these concerns, it should not be necessary for the WG to work on it IMO. Perhaps this hypothetical draft could be published as an Informational RFC. After all a solution to these concerns is inherently a National Matter. The rules in various jurisdictions are likely to conflict or even be mutually exclusive in some cases. I dont find this discussion strange at all. I tried to out line it in my privacy and security draft. A draft BTW I have been asking for input to for quite some time. http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-shockey-enum-privacy-security-00.txt Ive been waiting for this to come up again and Kim's comments seem perfectly in line with my comments. why would anyone see a conflict between two possible AOR's sip:1234567 at domain.com the one I put in the DNS and sip:myfullname at domain.com the one I put on my business card _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum at ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Richard Shockey, Senior Manager, Strategic Technology Initiatives NeuStar Inc. 46000 Center Oak Plaza - Sterling, VA 20166 sip:rshockey(at)iptel.org sip:57141 at fwd.pulver.com ENUM +87810-13313-31331 PSTN Office +1 571.434.5651 PSTN Mobile: +1 703.593.2683, Fax: +1 815.333.1237 <mailto:richard(at)shockey.us> or <mailto:richard.shockey(at)neustar.biz> <http://www.neustar.biz> ; <http://www.enum.org> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< _______________________________________________ enum mailing list enum at ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum
- [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and ENUM … Fullbrook Kim (UK)
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Alexander Mayrhofer
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Otmar Lendl
- RE: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Pfautz, Penn L, ALABS
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… James Seng
- RE: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Fullbrook Kim (UK)
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… James Seng
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Carsten Schiefner
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Robert Schafer
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… James Seng
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Mike Hammer
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Carsten Schiefner
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Jeff Williams
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… John Curran
- RE: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Fullbrook Kim (UK)
- RE: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Pfautz, Penn L, ALABS
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… James Seng
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Mike Hammer
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Jim Reid
- RE: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Peterson, Jon
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Mike Hammer
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Richard Shockey
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Jeff Williams
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… James Seng
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… James Seng
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… James Seng
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Jeff Williams
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… James Seng
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Carsten Schiefner
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Mike Hammer
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Carsten Schiefner
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Mike Hammer
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Jeff Williams
- RE: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Fullbrook Kim (UK)
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Jeff Williams
- Re: [Enum] ENUM Privacy Consensus, RFC 3824 and E… Clive D.W. Feather