--On Sunday, September 13, 2009 22:00 -0700 Ole Jacobsen
<ole(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com> wrote:
John,
With all due respect: The WIDE folks, host of IETF 76, have
offered to showcase a technology that is being used
increasingly for all kinds of things including public
transportation system, door entry, and various other
interesting applications. We've labelled this as an experiment
and we've given everyone the option to NOT participate and
we've encouraged a discussion of the many issues surrounding
privacy and security that might arise by deploying such
technology. We've also, with the help of the host, outlined
some of the technical details and received feedback that I am
sure will help improve many operational and privacy/security
aspects of the experiment, details of which are being
designed as we speak. As you know, Asia in general and Japan
in particular is very high-tech and I am sure most IETF
attendees will find the experiment interesting.
Yes. But, as to the substance, I think Eric's comments are very
relevant here. As I pointed out in my note to Don, this ceases
to be a "host experiment" as soon as the IASA gets involved, and
the IASA certainly appears to be involved... and is making
policy decisions without adhering to what I believe to be the
requirements for IASA policy decisions.
There are countries in which the use of security cameras is very
widespread too, but I wouldn't expect the IETF --the same IETF
that has occasionally taken very strong positions against bans
on encryption technologies to protect privacy -- to endorse them.
To be clear, I think it is entirely reasonable for a host to
propose something like this, either as a "technology
demonstration" or as an "experiment" (I think of the two as
different; YMMD). I think it is entirely reasonable for the
IASA to say "tentatively ok" without turning that into a big
deal or public process, and make an announcement to the
community about the plan, and I see that as having been done.
But when, after the announcement, when the community expresses
considerable concerns, I expect the IASA (and, as appropriate
the sponsor) to engage directly on the questions and to treat
the decisions as a policy matter in which the community has to
be involved. And that is different from saying "it is an
experiment", "...help improve many operational and
privacy/security aspects of the experiment", without any signs
of being willing to entertain the null hypothesis of "maybe this
isn't a good idea without time and resources for more
consideration and openness".
...
Just to be clear, the IAOC did not initiate the RFID
experiment, and you are correct that the community did not
ask for it. The WIDE folks are working very hard to provide us
with a great meeting, and as part of this effort they are
showcasing some cool technologies. The RFID system is one such
technology.
But, as I said to Don, not a technology demonstration that the
IASA needs to facilitate on the one hand and then pretend does
not involve policy decisions about secretariat and other
involvements on the other.
john
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf