The registration number links to a registration that includes an email address, should that need to be looked up for some reason later.
Holding minimal information for the purpose, and keeping that information as non-identifiable to the holder as possible, would be nice properties? Tim On 17 Jun 2012, at 08:36, Yoav Nir wrote: > This creates a distinguished identity, so if two "Fei Zhang"s attended in > Paris (only case I found in the attendee list), this would distinguish which > of them attended a particular meeting. It would not, however, tie them to an > identity on the mailing list, or to the "Fei Zhang" who attends the Vancouver > meeting, so I'm not sure what purpose it serves. > > Yoav > > -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim > Chown > Sent: 16 June 2012 13:54 > To: Joel jaeggli > Cc: IETF Chair; IETF; ietf-boun...@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Future Handling of Blue Sheets > > If the purpose is simply differentiation of people with the same names, could > we not ask people to enter the last four digits of their IETF registration > number, which would presumably be unique, while being easy to remember? The > number could even be on your badge to always be easy to look up. > > Unless there's some reason to keep registration numbers private? > > That would also allow poorly handwritten names to more readily be > checked/corrected by OCR when the sheets are scanned. > > Tim > > On 16 Jun 2012, at 04:50, Joel jaeggli wrote: > >> On 6/15/12 14:42 , edj....@gmail.com wrote: >>> I presume it is the same data that people input into the "Organization" >>> field when they register for the meeting. >> >> I do change mine based on what capacity I'm attending a particular >> meeting in. That goes for email address on existing blue sheets as well... >> >> The nice people who send me a check every two weeks don't generally >> fund my attendance. >> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Ed J. >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Eric Burger <eburge...@standardstrack.com> >>> Sender: ietf-boun...@ietf.org >>> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 17:37:50 >>> To: IETF Chair<ch...@ietf.org> >>> Cc: IETF<ietf@ietf.org> >>> Subject: Re: Future Handling of Blue Sheets >>> >>> Do we have guidelines as to what is an "organization affiliation"? >>> >>> On Jun 14, 2012, at 5:26 PM, IETF Chair wrote: >>> >>>> Two things have occurred since the message below as sent to the IETF mail >>>> list. First, we got a lawyer in Europe to do some investigation, and the >>>> inclusion of the email address on the blue sheet will lead to trouble with >>>> the European privacy laws. Second, Ted Hardie suggested that we could >>>> require a password to access the scanned blue sheet. >>>> >>>> Based on the European privacy law information, the use of email will >>>> result in a major burden. If the email address is used, then we must >>>> provide a way for people to ask for their email address to be remove at >>>> any time in the future, even if we got prior approval to include it. >>>> Therefore, I suggest that we collect organization affiliation to >>>> discriminate between multiple people with the same name instead of email >>>> address. >>>> >>>> Based on Ted's suggestion, I checked with the Secretariat about using a >>>> datatracker login to download the scanned blue sheet. This is fairly easy >>>> to do, once the community tracking tools are deployed. However, with the >>>> removal of the email addresses from the blue sheets, it is unclear that >>>> there is any further need for password protection of these images. >>>> Therefore, I suggest that we proceed without password protection for the >>>> blue sheet images. >>>> >>>> Here is a summary of the suggested way forward: >>>> >>>> - Stop collecting email addresses on blue sheets; >>>> >>>> - Collect organization affiliation to discriminate between multiple >>>> people with the same name; >>>> >>>> - Scan the blue sheets and include the images in the proceedings for >>>> the WG session; >>>> >>>> - Add indication to top of the blue sheet so people know it will be >>>> part of the proceedings; and >>>> >>>> - Discard paper blue sheets after scanning. >>>> >>>> Russ >>>> >>>> >>>> On May 6, 2012, at 12:46 PM, IETF Chair wrote: >>>> >>>>> We have heard from many community participants, and consensus is quite >>>>> rough on this topic. The IESG discussed this thread and reached two >>>>> conclusions: >>>>> >>>>> (1) Rough consensus: an open and transparent standards process is more >>>>> important to the IETF than privacy of blue sheet information. >>>>> >>>>> (2) Rough consensus: inclusion of email addresses is a good way to >>>>> distinguish participants with the same or similar names. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Based on these conclusions, the plan is to handle blue sheets as follows: >>>>> >>>>> - Continue to collect email addresses on blue sheets; >>>>> >>>>> - Scan the blue sheet and include the image in the proceedings for >>>>> the WG session; >>>>> >>>>> - Add indication to top of the blue sheet so people know it will be >>>>> part of the proceedings; and >>>>> >>>>> - Discard paper blue sheets after scanning. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On behalf of the IESG, >>>>> Russ >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > > Scanned by Check Point Total Security Gateway.
