+1
IETF RFC's are quoted in Government Policy documents all the time.
The issue in STIR is particularly distressing. The regulators are actively
asking for help here and I'm convinced the IETF can make a substantial
contribution here.
http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~hgs/papers/2013/2013-source-identity.pptx
PAWS is a particularly good example of where some policy people are actively
and productively participating Providing insight as well as requirements to
the protocol development.
-----Original Message-----
From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of
Hannes Tschofenig
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 10:49 AM
To: Arturo Servin
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Policy makers
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
A minor remark: The IAB had been interacting with different types of
government bodies for a longer time.
While some of these efforts are not so visible just have a look at the
upcoming IETF meeting. There is a BOF about STIR and the problem statement
document provides some context to activities that have received attention by
the regulatory community.
Here is the pointer:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-peterson-secure-origin-ps-00
Of course, it would be a bit too much to expect regulators to work on the
detailed protocol proposals. We do, however, point them to our work and some
of them (either though ISOC or by themselves) will participate at the
upcoming IETF meeting.
You can easily find many other examples in the IETF, such as ECRIT
(emergency services), PAWS (about whitespace database access), or MILE
(about security incident information sharing). On the last item we are
organizing a workshop on the Friday before the IETF meeting and the topic
itself is currently high on the agenda of CyberSecurity activities by
various governments. Here is a link to the workshop info:
http://siis.realmv6.org/
Ciao
Hannes
On Jun 21, 2013, at 12:06 PM, Arturo Servin wrote:
On 6/21/13 2:38 AM, SM wrote:
At 11:00 20-06-2013, The IAOC wrote:
series of events and programs in South America. This would include:
- Increasing the IETF Fellows and policy makers from the region
I don't see any policy makers reviewing Internet-Drafts. I don't see
any policy makers writing IETF RFCs. Policy makers do not usually
participate in IETF discussions.
You haven't and probably won't. But they were invited (IMHO) not to
participate in the IETF to review or write I+D but to know the IETF,
what we do, how we work; and how governments and the IETF can collaborate.
I think that ISOC should continue with that effort.
Regards,
as
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.19 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJRxGfCAAoJEGhJURNOOiAtfzcH/3jfmv2I9yf5JqUTkxWrzgCC
o+a69268JLzSSkqjJ3AoJeQTQpjTAI3FrvlJzJgW8+b5a1W0FFnlIVubSaLVCFqt
h1kbtFiQJCzQyra6qBP2eUUX8l26eQg1xwVhgrkIqgYSEfItW93aQt2Rzyodmb7O
R7XTdoDy+LwgtG+CL91bABNer4GBAvSlhgiuqpZLSjTmbMYONpbPPUw6xNtm9Nzz
S6T4N19po9mTtEMrH27bbiU1QioMoRSvTXuO0DCaYFwksMCyi+Lx8l9vvO0lgl/3
zxoxeaXss43U1YN//JGiKZq5BSIKeGmkvE3jIeFqBL8X8/+cauTXJ/bA0PsEOiI=
=XWQ4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----