On 1/1/14, Russ White <russw(_at_)riw(_dot_)us> wrote:
.....
The fact is that the IETF has designed a suite of protocols that are mostly
unsecure, and widely used in a world where we're just starting to see the
importance of security around not only your credit card number, but also
your address book. That the IETF should make a statement saying, "we seem
to
have something backwards here, and it's about time we reverse our
assumptions," isn't a political statement at all -- it's a facing of
reality.
I agree, but we should not rush the document to IESG until we get
strong agreements from community. I commented before that the document
should be informational not BCP, becasue it should be saying as you
say, Hay we now thought about it and we think this is what we will do.
Refering why I feel some politics, is if some people still want it as
BCP with quick process even with some disagreements, then I think the
draft became political now.
That the facing of reality has come about through any particular
political situation shouldn't imply that the statement is generally
political -- reacting to a political situation with a statement of a change
in policy isn't a political reaction, nor even (necessarily) a reaction
against the politics. Rather, it's just saying, "hey, we didn't think about
this problem before now, but now that we've thought about it, we need to
set
some new goals."
I agree with you only if the draft is a statement but IMHO it is not
only statement (its unclear practical statement), therefore, this
document should be informational and not BCP, do you agree?
Don't confuse the on list argument about politics with the actual point of
the draft; they're two different things entirely.
I know they are different but the authors of the document still have
it as BCP and they are not clear of how this document will be *used*.
Anyway, that's my 2c. I've read the opposing arguments, and I'm still in
support of this draft.
So if you support, could you just state directly how this document
will be used? I understand from your message and support that you mean
I support that it is giving statement-information that we the IETF
will plan for future goals and practices, and the information will be
used to start works to find solutions, but not used into the current
IESG document review process because we still have no clear
directions.
AB