On 06/04/15 15:36, Ned Freed wrote:
Maybe Stephen is conflating things, but I'm not, and I don't think most other
people on this thread are.
Actually, I think you and others are, as per my previous post. If you
want to debate privacy issues I think you ought start another thread
on that. This one is about FTP where we mostly seem to agree that
turning it off carefully might be right. I'd also note that those who
prefer that the FTP service not be turned off may be being drowned out
by the unstructured privacy side-show.
My point is only that if we want to debate the appropriate mechanisms
to put in place to protect the privacy of access to public IETF
information, then let's not do that based on the FTP corner case, but
by considering the general question.
And regardless of what those who don't read the words written might
think or imply, I have not argued here or ever for requiring all
accesses to IETF information to be encrypted. But the pattern of
seeing exaggerated claims as to what the "other" side is saying is
one that we also saw in the 7258 last call. I just think repeating
those canards again is pointless.
S.