Re: [datatracker-rqmts] New Requirement

[Royer Software and Services <[e-mail]>]

I am not trying to be a pain. I just don't see the need for private. And 
the explanation
given in that post does not convince me that anyone could reach any 
dangerous, invasive,
disruptive, or anything else conclusions by knowing that some people are 
looking at something.

Adding private seems like a lot of access control issues that  can 
break, have some misconfiguration,
or software bug, that would not reveal the same information. With the 
terabytes of data posted on the net (daily?),
it would be easier for an employer to just look at the employees 
activities than to write a tool to
see what drafts there employee is looking at. (re: the example in the 
current draft).

I have read the draft. Who could tell what it meant that  someone is 
looking at stuff?

My point is, what's private mean here?

Would it be private that the draft changed? That some status changed? 
That someone is looking
for keyword 'oops'? What would be private? The drafts are not private. 
The status of a draft
is not private.

The name of the ISE is not private. The names of the IESB members is not 
private. They are
going to review the drafts anyway. So, that is not private.

The title of the draft  is :

     Requirements for Draft Tracking by the IETF Community in the 
Datatracker

Not 'Requirement of the IAB, IETF, IESB, ISE, ...'

So that argument posted does not seem on point - in my opinion.

If it is needed, then it is needed. I have just not seen anyone post a 
reason
that convinces me that it is needed.

I have no plans to pound on this issue. I am trying to understand it.

-Doug