Are we going to allow these pigeons to remain anonymous? Shouldn't we require them to disclose their identities -- particularly if they are selling communication services to the public? As you all surely know, a lot of them are just fly-by-night businesses. John Horton President and CEO, LegitScript *Follow LegitScript*: LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/company/legitscript-com> | Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/LegitScript> | Twitter <https://twitter.com/legitscript> | *Blog <http://blog.legitscript.com>* | Google+ <https://plus.google.com/112436813474708014933/posts> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 9:04 AM, James Gannon <james@cyberinvasion.net> wrote:
I’m happy to consider RFC1149 https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1149.txt for our purposes here, however even carrier pidgeons recommend encryption
Security Considerations
Security is not generally a problem in normal operation, but special measures must be taken (such as data encryption) when avian carriers are used in a tactical environment
Always willing to come to a compromise =)
-James Gannon From: <gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of "Don M. Blumenthal" Date: Tuesday 29 September 2015 16:24 To: PPSAI Subject: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Correction
For this morning’s callers. Passenger pigeons are extinct. Carrier pigeon still is a viable option.
I originally wrote that carrier pigeons still are on the table. I’m glad that I reread.
_______________________________________________ Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg mailing list Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg
