ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Future Handling of Blue Sheets

2012-04-24 02:38:34

On Apr 23, 2012, at 9:05 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:



On 4/23/2012 1:13 AM, Kireeti Kompella wrote:
RFCs are not gospel. They can, and, in this instance, should, be changed: 
either remove that last item, or stately explicitly that there is no 
expectation of privacy at IETF meetings.  (I have a sinking feeling I know 
which way that will go.)

Actually, an RFC like this /is/ gospel, for this topic.  Gospel can be 
changed, as you note, according to IETF consensus.

However as much as I appreciate the benefits of privacy and the detriments of 
eroding it, I think there is an odd conceptual confusion taking place here:  
This is an entirely public event.  It makes no sense to participate in a 
formal portion of that event and expect privacy.

+1

The work we do in the IETF is done in public.  It is a basic element of our 
open standards process.

Bob



That said, I've certainly no objection to adding to the bloat of warnings and 
declarations that we already have, in the humorous belief that listing this 
disclaimer will somehow change people's expectations...

d/
-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net