Fair enough. I think it would be reasonable to ask that:
- the draft include the word “privacy”
- the draft discuss the issues around relying on an identifier that
persists across changes in device ownership
There may be an issue concerning a SIP-related identifier which is
unavailable on millions of mobile devices which do not have IMEIs, but it’s
quite possible that it’s non-applicable in the context of the draft. -T
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 6:23 PM, John C Klensin <john(_at_)jck(_dot_)com> wrote:
--On Saturday, July 20, 2013 11:36 -0700 Tim Bray
<tbray(_at_)textuality(_dot_)com> wrote:
So if it's going to be used, exactly as specified, whatever
we do, then what value is added by the IETF process? -T
See my earlier note, but mostly to aid in getting the
documentation right. For example, to the extent that the recent
discussion results in a more complete treatment of privacy
and/or security considerations in the documentation, that is a
net improvement and added value.
john