ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Last call: draft-montemurro-gsma-imei-urn-16.txt

2013-07-20 13:11:07


On 07/20/2013 04:06 PM, Scott Brim wrote:
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Stephen Farrell
<stephen(_dot_)farrell(_at_)cs(_dot_)tcd(_dot_)ie> wrote:

Wrt privacy in general...

On 07/20/2013 02:56 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
 Any volunteers
to get in front of the mic lines?

I'd welcome that discussion. I'd love to see us have a
BCP61-like [1] RFC on the topic of privacy and I also
reckon that that'd help short-cut a number of IETF LCs
and IESG DISCUSSes. (For example the Forwarded HTTP
header and WebFinger both caused extensive discussions.)

FWIW, my personal preference would be that such a BCP
would attempt to make our work be more privacy friendly
and by default though I'm not quite how how best to try
achieve that though.

But, even if the outcome wasn't a BCP along the lines
I'd prefer, I think such a beast would still be worth
having if it meant we could avoid a whole lot of these
kinds of similar discussions on individual drafts.

S.

[1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/bcp61

I agree completely.  Doesn't draft-iab-privacy-considerations do what
you want?  

As John said, that sets out considerations but what I'm
talking about here would be a BCP, so no that's a useful
input but doesn't represent an IETF consensus position
the way a BCP would.

S.

(And no matter what gets agreed to at a general level, we
will still have these discussions about specifics.)





<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>