Re: [datatracker-rqmts] Slides for the face-to-face BoF next week

SM <sm@resistor.net> Tue, 02 November 2010 15:15 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@resistor.net>
X-Original-To: datatracker-rqmts@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: datatracker-rqmts@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A47828C12C for <datatracker-rqmts@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Nov 2010 08:15:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.372
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.372 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, SARE_SUB_OBFU_Q1=0.227, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ny9rOuEs4V+T for <datatracker-rqmts@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Nov 2010 08:15:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ns1.qubic.net (ns1.qubic.net [208.69.177.116]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14BD228C12A for <datatracker-rqmts@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Nov 2010 08:15:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net ([10.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by ns1.qubic.net (8.14.5.Alpha0/8.14.5.Alpha0) with ESMTP id oA2FEwVD007769 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 2 Nov 2010 08:15:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1288710925; x=1288797325; bh=7kluat5cOhVG3ZXS5F87kNVdFFROTEdORXDupZonzeE=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type:Cc; b=umyhhDzjJe3vInK97xa61Cks1qi9Eo9w07/8aCgQ8EtK+gw0JL6mKxXdFH1C1oBvn 2QNiS6VW9X5PkVvP1X8QsJ1XVy0xaPfqXhkEFVuwQYvYbzQFctOyLkV5cyRAeJiUEF hh8JCfWT4BKGJLOYvyDCQbUzA4oX4Z6WZDeazOZY=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1288710925; x=1288797325; bh=7kluat5cOhVG3ZXS5F87kNVdFFROTEdORXDupZonzeE=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type:Cc; b=SobrHhEeM1/eHBRja+nTZodegbtgCDvGCq6fUJIQWqXf6TKKna26NxfwUaokkdjmK qrcNBAlpyEIcmxMoamLNHIC03gjhK7b1T5w6UGXFhcXgdAG2ADEZ42MC9fB/OMxd6n VzyfaPUzim2fXEWG5fgHj4IWFDKMypgnrcmIJ66w=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=mail; d=resistor.net; c=simple; q=dns; b=W3UMopU0pjZZhCQ5xidnGUCJainsQ83gYOl5AQrwe5/pemMv8bzd5Jz+XrEIRi1uq GZ8UQ3ILNt2C2VwC+CNdvYctROdNBS53bmnrT+aP5MNYIwX97qDfXLOcbkr8ZiJ7COI Db5oyjq78gwhghYkm8ek+6FTMNZv7OkbUD/BuJg=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20101102074555.099f1830@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2010 08:04:13 -0700
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
From: SM <sm@resistor.net>
In-Reply-To: <p0624088ac8f4ef10b46d@[10.20.30.249]>
References: <p06240800c8ecfbb84168@[10.20.30.249]> <p0624088ac8f4ef10b46d@[10.20.30.249]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Cc: datatracker-rqmts@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [datatracker-rqmts] Slides for the face-to-face BoF next week
X-BeenThere: datatracker-rqmts@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <datatracker-rqmts.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/datatracker-rqmts>, <mailto:datatracker-rqmts-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/datatracker-rqmts>
List-Post: <mailto:datatracker-rqmts@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:datatracker-rqmts-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/datatracker-rqmts>, <mailto:datatracker-rqmts-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2010 15:15:25 -0000

Hi Paul,
At 15:28 01-11-10, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>Greetings again. I have uploaded the proposed slides for the BoF to 
>the IETF site; see <http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/79/slides/iddtspec-0.pdf>;.

On Page 12:

  "Lots of reasons why someone would not
   someone else to know which drafts they are
   following"

Did you forget a word in there?

That page is about "Lists should be able to be private".  Do you 
really want to get into a discussion about privacy?  As the work of 
the IETF is supposed to be open, I suggest letting anyone who is 
"subscribed" to a draft see who else is following it.  Otherwise, 
you'll have to define who should have access to the information.

Regards,
-sm