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

[Henrik Levkowetz <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

On 2010-11-02 16:04 SM said:
> 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.

No, I think that's turned around.  I think it's as wrong to assume that
personal configuration information is public by default.  With the
possibility to create personal configuration information which resides
on the server (something we haven't really had a lot of on the IETF
servers up till now) the assumption should be that that individual
configuration information is private unless the person chooses to make
it public.

This following isn't an exact parallel, but with email, we have a
situation where list email is public, and the whole purpose of list
emails are to reach people publicly; while emails sent to individual
persons outside of a list are not (and should not be) automatically
assumed to be public.  Thus information is only automatically public
when it's explicitly intended to be so.

When you bookmark web pages in your web browser the information is
private, unless you explicitly publish the information.  When you
subscribe to a feed, that information resides in your feed reader
(or in the Google Reader) and it's not public unless you make it
so.

With the possibility to individually configure services provided by
the IETF servers, we should (I think) respect that people don't
necessarily want others to know what they configure.  If they want
people to know, they are free to make the information public, but
we shouldn't force the information to be public.  That would most
likely make these services less valuable than they could be to a lot
of people, and that seems less than optimal to me.


	Henrik