Re: [datatracker-rqmts] Publicly-readable and private/anonymous lists

[Russ Housley <[e-mail]>]

For what gain?  It is the list of documents you want to receive
notifications of changes.

Russ

On 12/8/2010 5:15 PM, Jim Schaad wrote:
> Russ,
> 
> I don't think you really want to restrict me to a single list.  This would
> just require that I create multiple logins in order to get multiple lists.
> 
> Jim
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [e-mail] [mailto:datatracker-rqmts-
>> [e-mail]] On Behalf Of Russ Housley
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2010 11:09 AM
>> To: Henrik Levkowetz
>> Cc: [e-mail]
>> Subject: Re: [datatracker-rqmts] Publicly-readable and private/anonymous
> lists
>>
>> Henrik:
>>
>> I agree that lists of lists is causing more complexity than expected.  I
> think that
>> putting it aside for now is a good choice.
>>
>> I wonder if it would be easier to start with two kinds of lists:
>>   --  public-and-published
>>   --  private-and-unpublished
>>
>> The public-and-published are used to follow the documents associated with
> a
>> particular topic.  They have a public owner that has agreed to add and
> remove
>> documents as appropriate.  This is like the web page that shows the
> possible
>> WG and non-WG mail lists that are available to IETF participants.
>>
>> The private-and-unpublished are part of a single user's preferences.
>> They are not shared, and they are owned by that user.  Each user gets one
> and
>> only one of them.
>>
>> Russ
>>
>> On 12/8/2010 5:25 AM, Henrik Levkowetz wrote:
>>> Hi Paul,
>>>
>>> Looking this over, both specification and implementation of these
>>> notification specifications ('lists') seems to becoming more and more
>>> complex, and I'm not convinced that the complexity buys us a lot.  The
>>> whole issue comes about because of the decision that people should be
>>> able to include another list in their notification list.
>>>
>>> I would like to do away with the whole complexity of this by saying
>>> (at least for this round -- we can always re-open this again when we
>>> have some practical experience with the first implementation) -- by
>>> saying that lists can't include other lists, and all lists are
>>> anonymous and unpublished.
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> 	Henrik
>>>
>>> On 2010-12-08 03:36 Paul Hoffman said:
>>>> Greetings again. It's time to spin up this list again, and a few people
> have
>> told me that specifying how public lists are publicly-readable and how
>> private/anonymous lists are created and managed will unblock a bunch of
>> other open issues. There was a lot of interest in these topics at the mic
> in
>> Beijing.
>>>>
>>>> The current text is below. This is just starting text, and it doesn't
> cover the
>> idea that some private/anonymous lists might have publicly-readable
>> counterparts if the list owner wants.
>>>>
>>>> So, please say what you think should be done here. Do you have a
>> preference between private and anonymous? Do you have ideas for public
> lists?
>>>>
>>>> To facilitate the discussion, there will be a WebEx-based telechat on
> Friday,
>> December 17. Information on that comes in the next message. If we have
> great
>> consensus before the telechat, we can use that time to move on other open
>> issues.
>>>>
>>>> --Paul Hoffman
>>>>
>>>> ======================================
>>>>
>>>> 2.1.3.  Requirement: Some lists must be able to be private or
>>>> anonymous
>>>>
>>>>    Seeing a list of drafts that covers multiple areas of interest can
>>>>    tell you something about the person who created the list.  For
>>>>    example, you might be able to guess that they might be looking for a
>>>>    job in a different field by looking at their list of drafts of
>>>>    interest.  Of course, anyone can follow individual drafts today
>>>>    without having that be exposed; however, following a particular
> group
>>>>    of drafts can reveal information about a person.
>>>>
>>>>    There is a open issue about whether lists should be default be
>>>>    private/anonymous or public, and how that default should be manifest
>>>>    in the eventual UI for creating lists.
>>>>
>>>>    The first proposed methods that might keep lists private/anonymous
>>>>    are:
>>>>
>>>>    o  Private lists might only be available using passwords or some
>>>>       other common authentication mechanism.  This would require that
>>>>       the Datatracker have a subscription process for users that could
>>>>       assign passwords, and a per-user process for adding lists to a
>>>>       user account.  (If the current Datatracker username and login
>>>>       scheme is used, the interface needs to be improved so that
> getting
>>>>       a new login, and changing one's password, are significantly
>>>>       easier.)
>>>>    o  Anonymous lists might be assigned random URLs from a very large
>>>>       (2^128) namespace, and the user who creates a list does not tell
>>>>       others the assigned URL.  This method makes it impossible for
>>>>       someone to search the entire set of assigned lists.  Given that
>>>>       the URLs for lists are most likely going to be copy-and-pasted
>>>>       anyway, having long random strings in the list's URL is not an
>>>>       impediment.
>>>>
>>>> 2.1.4.  Requirement: It must be easy for IETF leadership and
> individuals
>>>>         to make lists they create publicly-readable
>>>>
>>>>    Private or anonymous lists are fine for individuals, but publicly-
>>>>    readable lists can magnify the value to the whole community.  In
>>>>    fact, some early commenters on this document emphasized that
>>>>    publicly-readable lists will be more valuable to the IETF than
>>>>    helping individuals track documents that are only of interest to
>>>>    them.
>>>>
>>>>    Probably the easiest method to implement publicly-readable lists is
>>>>    to make them read-only aliases for private or anonymous lists.  This
>>>>    would allow the list originators to control the contents of the list
>>>>    as normal, but also allow anyone to view the results in the
>>>>    Datatracker and/or subscribe to notifications.  There may be other
>>>>    methods that would also make sense, and this section might change in
>>>>    the future.
>>>>
>>>>    Publicly-readable lists should have short URLs that can be
>>>>    transcribed without relying on copy-and-paste.  The names in the
> URLs
>>>>    for lists that are associated with IETF activities (initially, the
>>>>    lists created by WG chairs and ADs) can be mnemonic, but other
> public
>>>>    lists should have names that are not mnemonic in order to prevent
>>>>    name-squatting.
>>>>
>>>>    It is important to note that publicly-readable lists can only be
>>>>    changed by the owners.  Allowing many people to change the contents
>>>>    of a list would probably lead to lists that are not very useful to
>>>>    typical users.
>>>>
>>>>    Proposed later requirements include having the Datatracker list all
>>>>    of the publicly-readable lists (or certainly at least the ones
>>>>    associated with IETF activities), and having links from WG pages in
>>>>    Datatracker to the publicly-readable lists maintained by the WG
>>>>    chairs.
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> datatracker-rqmts mailing list
>>>> [e-mail]
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/datatracker-rqmts
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> datatracker-rqmts mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/datatracker-rqmts
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> datatracker-rqmts mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/datatracker-rqmts
> 
>