RDRS Small Team, I've given some thought to Privacy and Proxy Providers. Here are my conclusions. 1. Privacy and Proxy providers are qualitatively different. Privacy providers provide alternatve contact details -- email, phone, physical address -- but do not obscure the registrant's identity. The purpose is to route correspondence to people who are designated to accept and act on the registrant's behalf, and to avoid disclosing the registrant's direct contact details. In the normal physical world, this is accomplished by explicitly designating a correspondence address. In the current implementations of registration data, inserting the correspondence address into the data elements allocated to the registrant's contact is mistake that has two consequences. - It obscures the fact that the contact data is noit related to the registrant but is, instead, contact data for a different role. - It makes it impossible to include registrant contact information in the database that may -- or should -- be available to authorized requestors. - The correct path forward is to define a new role, Correspondent. This role is optional. If it is included, in indicates where correspondence should be directed. This data should usually be public. In contrast, the registrant's address, etc. can be private and not disclosed in response to normal requests. 2. Proxy providers fall into two categories, known and unknown. Unknown proxy providers should be treated as ordinary registrants. That is, they should be presumed to be the actual registrant, with all of the rights, privileges, responsibilities and obligations as any other registrant. Known proxy providers should be identified as such. One possible way to do so is to extend the distinction between Natural and Legal Persons to include a third category, Known Proxy Provider. The concept of Known Proxy Provider is not the same as an accredited proxy provider. Accreditation presumably implies an agreement with the proxy provider to adhere with some rules regarding disclosure to appropriate requestors. The concept of a Known Proxy Provider simply conveys to the requestor that the registration has been carried out by a proxy provider, but there is no implication as to what the proxy provider will do when asked to reveal the beneficial registrant. 3. Proxy providers pose a potential policy conflict Registrars have obligations to collect accurate registration data, and they have an obligation to protect that data from inapprpriate disclosure. Where does a proxy provider fit into this picture? What service does it provide that is not in conflict with the registrar's role? Thanks, Steve