Well according to https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2549 RFC2549 there are some privacy concerns with certain pigeon types, I think we will have to start a subgroup to assess that John.

I am sure that the NCSG will fight for the rights of all users, we don’t discriminate on the basis of featheryness.

-James ‘squawk' Gannon

From: John Horton
Date: Tuesday 29 September 2015 17:09
To: James Gannon
Cc: "Don M. Blumenthal", PPSAI
Subject: Re: [Gnso-ppsai-pdp-wg] Correction

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 | Facebook | Twitter | Blog | Google+

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