<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
>Following recent discussions on this mailing list regarding
personal data, the RIPE NCC would like to clarify a few points.
<br>
<br>
<br>
<font face="sans-serif" size="2">I have a few questions to RIPE and
the
RIPE community:</font>
<br>
<br>
<font face="sans-serif" size="2">-The issue of whois access is not
specific
to an RIR so why isn't the issue elevated to the ASO so the
policies are consistent across RIR's?</font>
<br>
<br>
<font face="sans-serif" size="2">-What requirements does the EU set
for
personal information where the owner has agreed to place the
information
in a publicly available database? Each discussion I have seen
merely says personal information must be protected without
any discussion as to whether permission was given to make the
information available. </font>
<br>
<br>
<font face="sans-serif" size="2">-Why is the abuse contact
fundamentally
different than the other types of contacts as it relates to the
protection
of personal information?</font>
<br>
<br>
<font face="sans-serif" size="2">-Once RIPE reviewed the report from
the task force was apparently a legal review completed. Is that
review available
to the public?</font>
<br>
<br>
<font face="sans-serif" size="2">-Why does task force report have
little or no useful information about how the conclusions were
reached?</font><br>
<br>
<font face="sans-serif" size="2">-Since these mailing lists and
meetings
are only a tiny fraction of Internet users what initiatives are
there to
solicit opinions of those being affected by the decisions? </font>
In this case spam, abuse, and access to the whois data is a
universal issue and not limited within a region. there is a large
gap between the task force report and the implementation of the
AUP. Isn't this policy setting by the RIPE NCC? (such as <font
face="sans-serif" size="2">setting a limit of
a certain number of queries per day, disregarding the fact that
some requests are "pass-through"
and the IP they detect is not the actual IP address, definition of
"bulk" access, etc.) </font><br>
<br>
<font face="sans-serif" size="2">-Since the current restriction do
little
or nothing to stop "harvesters" from collecting the information
(since they use a distributed system of IP's) what is the purpose
of IP
address restrictions (other than cases of DOS attacks which is
obvious)?</font>
<br>
<br>
<font face="sans-serif" size="2">-What exactly is "abuse of the
information"? Is this defined anywhere? It seems to me
that each person will have a different idea of what is "abuse"
depending on their personal view of the world. </font>
<br>
<br>
Thank You<br>
</body>
</html>