Agreed. Although the Security Considerstions could mention the extra security gained by this? Maybe we can also mo longer allow postal addresses and telephone numbers from all existing drafts? :) Sent from mobile device > On Nov 30, 2018, at 17:23, Russ Housley <housley@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I have read this (very short) document. I agree with the proposed change to the IANA registry. Let's not collect any unnecessary information from registrants, > > Russ > > >> On Nov 30, 2018, at 5:03 PM, The IESG <iesg-secretary@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider the >> following document: - 'Update to the TRIP IANA Registry Rules Regarding >> Postal Addresses' >> <draft-arkko-trip-registry-update-00.txt> as Informational RFC >> >> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final >> comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the >> ietf@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2018-12-28. Exceptionally, comments may be >> sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of >> the Subject line to allow automated sorting. >> >> Abstract >> >> >> This memo updates the IANA registry rules for the Telephony Routing >> over IP (TRIP) protocol, by no longer requiring that postal addresses >> be included in contact information. >> >> This memo updates RFC 3219. >> >> >> >> >> The file can be obtained via >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-arkko-trip-registry-update/ >> >> IESG discussion can be tracked via >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-arkko-trip-registry-update/ballot/ >> >> >> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. >> >> >> >>
