Dear DB-WG, Hoping that this email finds you in good health!
Please find my comments below, inline... Le lundi 20 juin 2022, Ronald F. Guilmette via db-wg <[email protected]> a écrit : > In message <CAKvLzuFA0y8mOzPiiy4tHBCRUNUBbQgJc-DD54E-S+0TW=StiA@mail. > gmail.com> > denis walker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> [...] > > > >> What gives you or anyone the right to take away a member's rights to > have > >> their true and actual mailing address in their own public WHOIS records? > > > >Again you simply don't understand the issue. "their true and actual". This > >address is 'defined' in the database documentation as "The postal address > >of a contact related to the organisation". That can be anyone based in any > >location in the world, as Europol have discovered. > > Sounds like a definite problem to me! So lets fix that. Let's require > *at least* the REAL name and address of each member to be present in that > member's public WHOIS record. > > Every new member has to submit some identifying documents at the time they > first become members, right? If it is a corporation, then a copy of the > formal and legal incorporation document(s) must be submitted as part of the > application process. If it is person, then either a copy of that person's > passport or some other form of government-issued identification document > must be submitted as part of the new/prospective member's application for > membership, right? So we take this "real" member name & address info, > copy it off those bona fide documents, and stick the same data into the > member's public-facing WHOIS record. Is this just, like, too simple, > or what? > > > Hi Ronald, Thanks for your email, brother. ...i agree, you should be a bit fair with Denis :-/ You know, reducing your tone would not, imho, imply any loss in the value and strength of your arguments at all :-/ Having said the above, these [1,2,3,4,5] RIPE Lab articles provide, imho, interesting discussions, and very useful information, on topic... __ [1]: < https://labs.ripe.net/author/ad_castle/lessons-learned-from-ripe-when-creating-a-new-community-database-in-a-very-different-field/ > [2]: < https://labs.ripe.net/author/matt_parker/the-assisted-registry-check-let-us-help-you/ > [3]: < https://labs.ripe.net/author/athina/how-were-implementing-the-gdpr-legal-grounds-for-lawful-personal-data-processing-and-the-ripe-database/ > [4]: < https://labs.ripe.net/author/denis/review-of-database-consistency-service-dbconstat/ > [5]: < https://labs.ripe.net/author/denis/diff-functionality-in-the-ripe-database/> > > > As I have said, if there are natural person journalists, or activists, or > other folks who have other issues pertaining to lifestyle or whatever, and > who can make at least a prima facia case that they need to have both (a) > number resources AND also (b) privacy of their PII, then allow NCC to > accept their requests to be exempt from publication of their PII on a > case by case basis. For everybody else however, what you see (in the > public > WHOIS) is what you get, i.e. the real names and the real addresses. > > Problem solved! And everybody's happy. > > > At least my humble person will be! Many thanks for this alternative, i fully support. ...imho, a solution of a real problem shouldn't be implemented, if it removes the ability and solution that at least network operators (NO) actually have; and which allow them to freely and *privately* communicate each other...(home office addresses might be considered a distinct concern, though...). That kind of solutions would remove available, enventually *good*, solutions (new problems) and may contribute to more fragmentation within NO's community; amongst other possible consequences. https://labs.ripe.net/author/kranjbar/proposed-improvements-to-dummification-of-personal-data-in-the-ripe-database/#:~:text=It%20has%20been,exposed%20with%20no%20limits . https://labs.ripe.net/author/kranjbar/proposed-improvements-to-dummification-of-personal-data-in-the-ripe-database/#:~:text=The%20current%20dummification,the%20data%20protection%20rules . https://labs.ripe.net/author/kranjbar/proposed-improvements-to-dummification-of-personal-data-in-the-ripe-database/#:~:text=Proposed%20algorithm :,the%20objects%20below: https://labs.ripe.net/author/alexband/improving-the-management-of-ripe-database-objects-with-joint-responsibility/#:~:text=In%20the%20future,who%20query%20it . > > The only people who could be against this are people intent on committing > fraud or some other kind of nefarious skulduggery on the Internet WHILE > USING THEIR ASSIGNED NUMBER RESOURCES. > > > Ronald...this is not what drove my support to your proposed alternative :'-( ...and as said, above, imho you absolutely not need to use that kind of language to be heard, brother. Remain blessed, y'all! Shalom, --sb. > > >> So now, why don't you re-submit this proposal and instead propose that > *all* > >> mailing address information, including even the country name, be > redacted > >> from the data base for *all* members? > > > >It will be optional. > > Wait... WHAT??? > > Could you please repeat that? I want to make sure that even the people way > in the back heard that. > > So your -actual- proposal is to make *all* WHOIS information for *all* > classes > of RIPE members "optional"??? > > Take your time. If you misspoke, then by all means, please rephrase so as > clarify what you really meant to say. > > > Regards, > rfg > > -- > > [...] -- Best Regards ! __ baya.sylvain[AT cmNOG DOT cm]|<https://cmnog.cm/dokuwiki/Structure> Subscribe to Mailing List: <https://lists.cmnog.cm/mailman/listinfo/cmnog/> __ #LASAINTEBIBLE|#Romains15:33«Que LE #DIEU de #Paix soit avec vous tous! #Amen!» #MaPrière est que tu naisses de nouveau. #Chrétiennement «Comme une biche soupire après des courants d’eau, ainsi mon âme soupire après TOI, ô DIEU!»(#Psaumes42:2)
-- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/db-wg
