On Wed, May 23, 2018, at 14:05, Gould, James wrote: > I would like to understand the concern around the use of the roles. > There are cases where an organization can play multiple roles > (registrar, privacy proxy, dns provider, etc.) that helps defined what > kind of links can be made to it.
Just an example (I do not wish really to revive the discussion) among others: Imagine a registrar A for registry B, typically a ccTLD. Registrar A creates an organization O in this registry B It happens that O is a dns provider, let us say. So it is created with this role. Later O becomes ICANN accredited, for example. This is another role. What totally escapes me: why shoud this be reflected in any way, through registrar A in registry B because O is provisioned there? In short my main problem, and why I can not support this, is that I do not see the use case, besides for one registry that needs it to handle resellers, I doubt having seen another registry saying it will use it, so we are just paving the way to enable storing more data, where the world goes instead towards storing less or more carefully (see the current dramas around GDPR) Not everythint that can be done should be done. This is the main point I will try to address in a separate email since it is a generic issue, not specifically related to this proposal. -- Patrick Mevzek _______________________________________________ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
