[as an individual]
While I might quibble about some of the specifics of the proposed text,
I disagree with the characterization of "unhelpful." Both proposed
sections, in fact, make an attempt to be actionable.
In terms of tendentiousness, one could easily say the same of pretty
much any "Security Considerations" or "Privacy Considerations" section
we've ever published. But that's okay: a bias towards security and
privacy are characteristics we've chosen to take on in our documents.
The same applies to the assertion regarding "a distraction from the WG's
purpose": most protocols would "work" from a technical perspective
without guidance regarding security and privacy; and so one could
equally assert that such sections are also a "distraction" from the core
work of those protocols. A key reason people come to the IETF to do work
is the fact that it is a multi-stakeholder environment, designed to take
these kinds of secondary effects into account.
And so I would encourage people to engage on the substance of the
proposal rather than dismissing it out of hand.
/a
On 12/14/18 12:26 PM, John Levine wrote:
Having reviewed the proposed text, I would encourage the WG to ignore it.
It is unhelpful, tendentious and a distraction from the WG's purpose.
In the interest of not wasting any more time, this is my last message
on the topic.
R's,
John
In article <5f7d0b3e-c844-1700-c369-90bb41e82...@cis-india.org> you write:
Thank you for your comments on the proposed Human Rights Considerations
section. Please find the draft text below (with an accompanying Privacy
Considerations section which will also be useful); hope it is a good
starting point for consensus. ...
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
_______________________________________________
regext mailing list
regext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
