[Ietf-not43] Mail address mandatory?

[Eric A. Hall]

on 8/16/2002 2:39 AM Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 08:44:04AM -0500, Eric A. Hall
> <ehall@ehsco.com> wrote

>> The email address doesn't have to a primary account.
>
> [Sorry, I do not understand that one.]

You are not required to use <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>, but can instead use
<junk@hotmail.com> if you don't want to expose your real address.

>> The reason I made it mandatory is that there is no other form of
>> contact information which is viable. Postal mail doesn't help when
>> you are suffering aa DoS attack from a specific network, for example.
>>
>
> But phone contact helps in that case and I could say that "email does
> not help when there is completely broken network configuration which
> prevents email". No contact channel is 100 % reliable in every case,
> that's why we must have several.

This sounds like a good reason to mandate TWO contact forms. There's no
way I'd get away with that so I picked one that had to be provided. People
can provide as much or as little as they want but they have to provide
this one at a minimum.

>> In the end, it seems to me that if there isn't any contact
>> information available, there isn't any benefit to the service.
>
> For .eu, one of the ideas was to allow people to opt-out of all but one
> contact information (they have to accept that at least one among phone,
> fax or email, is public).

Can you please provide a pointer to the definitive policy statement? This
issue is not resolved in my mind either, and I'd like to see other texts
which may help.

>> There is another reason for using email addresses, which is that I
>> plan to define a lookup mechanism for contacts using the email addr
>> as the lookup key (EG, provide a way to find out which domains and
>> netblocks are associated with <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>).
>
> IPR people would love to have it but ordinary people (not big
> corporations lawyers) may disagree. I see that as a registry policy
> issue, which should not be forced by a technical protocol.

The profile will have to be voluntary. Since a favored email address will
reside in a single DIT -- but the associated resources will each reside in
their own independent DITs -- linking the different DITs will have to be
voluntary. EG, if I update my ntrg.com entry to point to ehall@ehsco.com,
there is no way that the owner of the ntrg.com entry will be able to
update the ehall@ehsco.com entry. As such, I will have to make that update
myself, meaning that it would be voluntary.

-- 
Eric A. Hall                                        http://www.ehsco.com/
Internet Core Protocols          http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/