Subject: RE: [Enum] Who Is?

From: "Shaw, Robert" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 17:49:39 +0100

Huh? danger danger...

The US ENUM Forum may/could offer up views on whether 
they believe there is a requirement for whois underneath 
the United States portion of the integrated numbering 
plan for 1 but only within that scope (and sub-zone cut). 

Therefore, it'd be more appropriate to express the views 
below within that narrower context. I don't see how the 
US ENUM forum could make statements like "There is no 
current requirement for a Whois function in e164.arpa 
domain" since a) it would not be responsible for 
delegation at that level nor b) at any other level except 
subzones of a portion of 1.e164.arpa. Requirements
or not for whois at other branches of that tree will be a 
matter of the authority for that portion of the numbering 
plan.

Likewise, a statement like "There will be No Whois function 
provided in e164.arpa in order [to] provide privacy for ENUM 
registrants (customers) personal" doesn't make any sense
since no personal data is present at that delegation level.
Even if the statement was intended to be broader in context
(e.g. you meant "under e164.arpa") then see scoping warning 
above. 

Bob
--
Robert Shaw <[email-masked]>
ITU Internet Strategy and Policy Advisor
International Telecommunication Union <http://www.itu.int>
Place des Nations, 1211 Geneva, Switzerland

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Freilich [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: 28 January 2002 16:55
> To: 'Lawrence Conroy'; [email-masked]
> Subject: RE: [Enum] Who Is?
> 
> 
> Lawrence,
> 
> I would suggest you view some of the output from the ENUM 
> Forum's Security &
> Privacy Task group.
> 
> http://www.enum-forum.org/  (look at the contributions section)
> http://www.enum-forum.org/documents/sec/SEC0011R0_Freilich_WHO
> IS_and_ENUM.do
> c
> 
> 
> At its Oct 23 meeting they discussed just this questions.  
> The results can
> be summarized in three basic points agreed to by the Forum:
> 
> 1. There is no current requirement for a Whois function in 
> e164.arpa domain
> 2. There will be No Whois function provided in e164.arpa in 
> order provide
> privacy for ENUM registrants (customers) personal.
> 3. And if there was an operational/maintenance need for a Whois like
> function then there would not be any Registrant data in the 
> operational
> protocol.
> 
> The main rationale for these decisions is to protect the privacy of
> customers.  A Whois database would possibly match a customers 
> phone number
> to their name and possible address.  This association has 
> serious privacy
> implications for this service and was the driving force on the Forum's
> recommendations.
> 
> Rob Freilich
> 972-729-5139
> 
> 
>  -----Original Message-----
> From: 	[email-masked] 
[mailto:[email-masked]]  On Behalf Of
Lawrence Conroy
Sent:	Monday, January 28, 2002 9:16 AM
To:	[email-masked]
Subject:	[Enum] Who Is?

Hi Folks,
    is it intended that there will be a Whois database associated with
e164.arpa and the hierarchy underneath?

best regards,
   Lawrence
--
[email-masked]: +44 1794 833666::<my opinions>:

_______________________________________________
enum mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum

_______________________________________________
enum mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum

_______________________________________________
enum mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum