Re: [ietf-privacy] Logging Recommendations for Internet-Facing Servers

S Moonesamy <> Mon, 16 June 2014 00:35 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16C8E1B298C for <>; Sun, 15 Jun 2014 17:35:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.849
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.849 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DATE_IN_PAST_03_06=1.592, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tJKP7GNoXfSe for <>; Sun, 15 Jun 2014 17:35:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49E391B298A for <>; Sun, 15 Jun 2014 17:35:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([]) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s5G0ZDH3014363 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 15 Jun 2014 17:35:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;; s=mail2010; t=1402878926; x=1402965326; bh=dk2KKZCn6HeqGSfkScox1u2+UbB9EX5n0b0CbcwHhlc=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=hQK6PGCVyDnTynEKsarcEomkArJnwB8AQo6OQYGQdcxQ+6W17D4GXj+niplHzcEwP rQSjA1lO+NVtdS3K6Z38trYJEYSIUPLQvhVUMOQ4IOkO+I2v4cf/fA3K8mpqdIYxBC /lMXeOD+zjHcW4qF+hGt3xTj4RER0QV59oCRLrt4=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;; s=mail; t=1402878926; x=1402965326;; bh=dk2KKZCn6HeqGSfkScox1u2+UbB9EX5n0b0CbcwHhlc=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=YeeA5Anc83GMAvmmrg51q/JRUnyMsalhLeip8xA/trsT04CHEZH8mTCsplK9KerDC dDyTnNZ4mIVc5TQKlba6VDKs142RorR2bzucptG5pnOfhQMa0yKpeylBWMMt26PutJ h8wpIN427yPHpTL8qir/329VxVmzAgW33Zs2w25A=
Message-Id: <>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2014 11:38:20 -0700
To: Stephen Farrell <>, Linus Nordberg <>
From: S Moonesamy <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Subject: Re: [ietf-privacy] Logging Recommendations for Internet-Facing Servers
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internet Privacy Discussion List <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 00:35:37 -0000

Hi Stephen,
At 05:51 15-06-2014, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>Q: How will that happen?
>A: Someone will need to write an I-D:-)
>If someone does such an I-D that is reasonable and improves
>privacy, I'll be happy to help that progress.


>Not sure if the BCP's RFC would need replacing or if updating
>the BCP with a 2nd RFC would be right myself, so talking to
>the original authors and/or the intarea list would seem wise.
>They might also have other stuff they'd like to revise, who
>knows. (The draft leading to this BCP [1] was an intarea [2]

In theory a (future) RFC can be added to BCP 162.  In practice people 
won't read it or miss it.  A first step might be to talk to the 
authors to see what they would like to do.  The INTAREA working group 
[1] lacks the expertise to review privacy-related drafts.  People 
with an actual interest in privacy will have to participate in the 
working group and review the proposed update to BCP 162.

S. Moonesamy