Re: [Ideas] Kathleen Moriarty's Block on charter-ietf-ideas-00-06: (with BLOCK)

Robert Moskowitz <> Tue, 10 October 2017 19:18 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07BB21346CB; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 12:18:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.301
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.301 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B3BK7Ot8osGx; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 12:18:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B22E91346E0; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 12:15:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8C43621C2; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 15:15:43 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id zjo5HFuehv8x; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 15:15:36 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from (unknown []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 68960621BB; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 15:15:35 -0400 (EDT)
To: Kathleen Moriarty <>, The IESG <>
References: <>
From: Robert Moskowitz <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 15:15:32 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Ideas] Kathleen Moriarty's Block on charter-ietf-ideas-00-06: (with BLOCK)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussions relating to the development, clarification, and implementation of control-plane infrastructures and functionalities in ID enabled networks." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 19:18:11 -0000

I am and have been on Jewish Holidays since Sept 20th and it continues 
until Oct 16th.  But there is some time between all of the actual 
Holidays to see how far I have fallen behind.

First:  I have a contract with Huawei to work on IDEAS and I believe I 
have a track record of concern for and methods of addressing privacy.  I 
plan on doing my best not to allow this item to slip even for ID/Loc 
technologies that are not fundimentally security based.  With my work on 
HIP, this whole area is one I have spent a lot of cycles thinking about 
and how I would tackle it if people would pay me to work on it (see 
start of this para).

Second:  Privacy is in the charter.  You want more privacy, work on the 

Third:  I am in private conversations with companies that want me to 
help develop point solutions that IDEAS is addressing in the broad. Only 
one of which is really paying attention to privacy and security.  This 
will happen, piecemeal, if the IETF does not get out in front of the 
wave.  Another 4 month delay is not good.  One of the projects is in 
final funding efforts.  And I think I am seeing only a piece of what 
companies are out there trying to invent.

Fourth: Privacy concerns are in the charter.  I have a number of IDEAS 
(pun intented) on how to build up a strong privacy model and still have 
expectation that it will be deployed.

Finally, I am just one person, and can be run over by an IETF bus. It 
has happened before.  I got ran over by the CANbus 25 years ago...


On 10/10/2017 12:25 PM, Kathleen Moriarty wrote:
> Kathleen Moriarty has entered the following ballot position for
> charter-ietf-ideas-00-06: Block
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> I think there should be another BoF to discuss the privacy aspects and let the
> community have a chance to voice opinions and fully hash this out.  I suspect
> we'll see appeals (rightfully so) if that does not happen.
> _______________________________________________
> Ideas mailing list