Re: [calsify] Barry Leiba's Discuss on draft-ietf-calext-eventpub-extensions-12: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Barry Leiba <[e-mail]>]

> >> — Section 10 —
> >> It’s good to refer to RFC 3986 for URI-related security considerations, and all
> >> of them do apply here.
> >>
> >> Something else that comes to mind that comes along with a set of new URIs is
> >> whether they actually point to what they say they do.  I don’t see that there’s
> >> any way to verify that they do, and I’m very skeptical about the effectiveness
> >> of warning an end user about this sort of thing, for many reasons.  I can see
> >> why allowing URIs is convenient and compelling, but I’m very heavily concerned
> >> about tracking and other privacy leaks, malicious and deceptive content, and
> >> other such problems, especially considering the prevalence of abusive calendar
> >> invitations these days.
> >>
> >> I’m not sure what the answer is here, but let’s have a discussion about it and
> >> see where we can go with it.
> >
> > Maybe a brief discussion at CalConect/IETF meeting?
>
> Yes, that sounds like a good idea.  We'll hold this until then.

I see the notes from the meeting, and all I see about this document is:

> Eventpub:
> - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-calext-eventpub-extensions/
> - Discussion about the SOURCE property (drop it)
> - Need to define “social calendaring”.

Was the URI issue I raised discussed?  If not, when can we discuss it
and clear this up?

Barry