George, > On Jul 20, 2017, at 1:00 PM, George Michaelson <g...@algebras.org> wrote: > > I probably will not carry the WG with me on this, but I find myself > thinking the PII aspect of client-ID makes it a wider-internet > question and we might have views as a WG, and promote questions as a > WG, but I think the "final call" on this is something which needs more > than WG approval.
A couple of points of precision on this: first, I’m not sure “PII” is rigorously defined in our context, so we might need to be more specific on that (although I agree with the intuitive sense you seem to have about it). Second, technically the WG doesn’t approve publication of a document anyway; a decision by the WG to advance a particular document along the process is neither necessary nor sufficient to get it published; there are several additional steps to publication approval. With those things said, however: > > Its a big question. I'd actually welcome adoption on many levels, but > that isn't to pre-empt that it goes to WGLC. I think we need to > formalize the issues and take them out of the WG for review and > discussion. > > documenting current practice is ok btw, but .. PII. > Agreed there are some aspects here that need cross-area review, and making sure that happens is part of the chairs’ followup from discussion of the draft to date. Suzanne _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
