You said:
"In the US and much of Europe, for example, discussions of techniques
for avoiding firewalls or anonymizing traffic are largely considered
technical, not political. (Although people might have political
reasons for discussing these topics.)
The concern is that in the Chinese context, the sets of technical and
political topics could be closer, if not overlapping -- that some
technical topics might not be overtly political, but might be close
enough to cause trouble."
This is only my PERSONAL opinion and does not constitute legal or
international advice etc, but:
Discussion of the topics you cite in your example would be perfectly
fine and not cause any "trouble". As I've said previously, our
proposed hosts are long-standing contributors and members of the IETF
community. They know "our ways" and if they seriously believed that
we'd be walking into a danger zone by having normal IETF topics on the
agenda they would not have invited us.
In due course, the IAOC will be making a statement on our decisions
about this meeting. As Ray said, this is expected to occur before
IETF 76. Until then, I am going to try to limit posting on this topic
since I'm already ranking too high on the Narten score :-)
Feel free to ask me about IETF 76 logistics, particularly on the
76attendees(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org list.
Cheers,
Ole
Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher, The Internet Protocol Journal
Cisco Systems
Tel: +1 408-527-8972 Mobile: +1 415-370-4628
E-mail: ole(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com URL: http://www.cisco.com/ipj
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf