[address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI justification requirements

On Wed, 27 Feb 2019, Kai 'wusel' Siering wrote:

> Am 26.02.2019 um 23:13 schrieb Cynthia Revström:
>> I have also been informed that this might be a rather unique case in regards to having multiple physical locations requiring PI space.
>
> It's not ? been there myself, and got really annoyed by the way the NCC 
> entered spanish-inquisition-mode (like asking for physical location of 
> DCs used, IMHO NOTB, and upstream mail contacts, again NOTB). That was 
> pre-GDPR, these days I'd follow up with "provide legal statement under 
> GDPR that allows you to ask this question, and process any answer". 
> Hrmpft.

Hi,

I fail to understand how a DC location could in any way be related to 
a GDPR violation.

I also don't understand how asking for upstream mail contacts (i.e. 
professional ones, that any ASN should in theory have published, 
role or individual shouldn't make a difference) can violate GDPR.

I guess "purpose" for asking is quite easy to understand -- checking if 
an upstream really exists at that point in time, which may be part of the 
process.

Cheers,
Carlos


> -kai
>
>
>