IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] Reminder - 3 WGLC active (respond by September 22nd)

Christian Huitema <huitema@microsoft.com> Fri, 18 September 2015 17:19 UTC

Return-Path: <huitema@microsoft.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3ED61AD21C for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 10:19:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.002
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3drKvsnDTaYg for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 10:19:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1on0751.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fc10::751]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF6FD1AD210 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 10:19:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=selector1; h=From:To:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=yR4arOemO2UNgF84hlzzQ7UgRf6Mqik8Wqq6kl8Dajc=; b=jWO1/UyQZyu3rMLye18fLPXl7HCOK138KsMt0v17xd3iiwnyQy9ZpB0H3iK1eJRFvZcGami185Q+eGU7qQDl4TtC7ClqIGU+hA8uyPzOwhAqnMzqMEO0uUJZZxG1YbmGth9wjLNJY9W1uru1ldFiRcUPAawGkWK7DQsW/YG+QPA=
Received: from DM2PR0301MB0655.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.160.96.17) by DM2PR0301MB0653.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.160.96.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.268.17; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 17:19:25 +0000
Received: from DM2PR0301MB0655.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.96.17]) by DM2PR0301MB0655.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.96.17]) with mapi id 15.01.0274.009; Fri, 18 Sep 2015 17:19:25 +0000
From: Christian Huitema <huitema@microsoft.com>
To: Sheng Jiang <jiangsheng@huawei.com>, "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>, "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Reminder - 3 WGLC active (respond by September 22nd)
Thread-Index: AdDwnV33FghozZ0wSZe7jWhslLShnQBPkeuAABaCKJA=
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 17:19:25 +0000
Message-ID: <DM2PR0301MB06553051C85BEAAC3B7576B4A8590@DM2PR0301MB0655.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <12a08a27874247419500be7a22781a5c@XCH-ALN-003.cisco.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B927BB69018@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B927BB69018@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=huitema@microsoft.com;
x-originating-ip: [131.107.192.155]
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DM2PR0301MB0653; 5:tKqKc1FePBtIk6WaxmHt3kYGcYOt7a7y+36zO3if+P3JT7di3vHyw0r3VYEow8pymOwzEXp/ZqW1MtNwdRRKqm6W41pkADdSLu27wopz0YKG8BvDwBMNc7hfAxHd/J0avRx2WV2IEvURvwLvmot7dg==; 24:3iqKnRvXh3wIbS+uxZLNv2ouCM9A27atDSSa4cE2XJOGZ6Dl0rT/MuoRXInNw37kOhTx99FB9CnWJlnHmLpFL3gZsKZrxO/7svnpCWSeSBo=; 20:m574hzQhfDKYuMM8jpypJ4uUmjJx9M9NWW+OJ2KTBFNY7BSH+IMcZVqpLBxAiHAMQFvaFpGEQlNnzzvKyQR4eQ==
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DM2PR0301MB0653;
x-o365eop-header: O365_EOP: Allow for Unauthenticated Relay
x-o365ent-eop-header: Message processed by - O365_ENT: Allow from ranges (Engineering ONLY)
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DM2PR0301MB065387D27B75D782229418FDA8590@DM2PR0301MB0653.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:;
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(601004)(2401001)(520078)(8121501046)(520075)(5005006)(3002001); SRVR:DM2PR0301MB0653; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DM2PR0301MB0653;
x-forefront-prvs: 0703B549E4
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(377454003)(24454002)(189002)(199003)(12213003)(5004730100002)(5007970100001)(4001540100001)(5002640100001)(77096005)(102836002)(97736004)(5003600100002)(101416001)(66066001)(2900100001)(5001860100001)(64706001)(68736005)(2501003)(5001830100001)(10090500001)(92566002)(86612001)(2950100001)(77156002)(106356001)(189998001)(33656002)(86362001)(46102003)(11100500001)(99286002)(76576001)(10290500002)(74316001)(40100003)(62966003)(5001960100002)(10400500002)(8990500004)(122556002)(107886002)(50986999)(76176999)(54356999)(87936001)(105586002)(81156007)(5005710100001)(5001770100001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DM2PR0301MB0653; H:DM2PR0301MB0655.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: microsoft.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 18 Sep 2015 17:19:25.3950 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM2PR0301MB0653
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/DagY3ptNmWqm5X7MOLnZ7Rg3KuI>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Reminder - 3 WGLC active (respond by September 22nd)
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dhcwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 17:19:46 -0000

On Thursday, September 17, 2015 11:35 PM, Sheng Jiang wrote:

> As coauthor of item 2 and 3, I am in favor of advancing these drafts. They are nice writing and present useful information. > The proposed mechanism of anonymity is feasible.

+1.

I think the privacy analyses are important and useful. As for the anonymity draft that I coauthored, I have been testing an implementation for several months now, and it definitely works as expected.

-- Christian Huitema

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email