Hi there,
Following others, this looks like a crazy situation. Reading the discussions for a long time it looks like you are turning around since months with contradictory actions and no clear convergence on the defined purposes. Nothing personal but just my opinion reading your discussions regularly.
I understand geofeeds may contain personal data but you manage the pointer not the content as others said. Personal information from geofeeds is not collected nor processed.
Citing the answer from Maria "other geolocation information is already provided in the RIPE Database (i.e. geoloc, country code attributes in ORG and resource objects)", I am even more confused:
- How can you guarantee a geoloc (latitude, longitude) is not personal information in that case? Following the recent discussions about the proposal to hide street addresses from the registry, this looks weird. A geoloc is entered by a user with no validation and nothing prevents people from putting coordinates to a location that identifies a real address (outside of this discussion, it's crazy to see geolocs pointing in the ocean, or maybe many subnets are in use on oil rigs...).
- Is there really a consensus about what the country code in "resource objects" other than organizations mean?
Citing your docs for inetnum object: "It has never been specified what this country represents. It could be the location of the head office of a multi-national company or where the server centre is based or the home of the End User. Therefore, it cannot be used in any reliable way to map IP addresses to countries.". Can we really consider this as geolocation information?
It's sad to see real solutions around geolocation (which helps users in many ways) overthought and killed in the eggs.
Kind regards,
Laurent Pellegrino