Re: [ietf-privacy] [Int-area] NAT Reveal / Host Identifiers

<> Fri, 06 June 2014 08:11 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E27791A0400; Fri, 6 Jun 2014 01:11:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RCKUvdjXWlrB; Fri, 6 Jun 2014 01:11:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9271F1A03C7; Fri, 6 Jun 2014 01:11:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (unknown [xx.xx.xx.1]) by (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id CAD35324384; Fri, 6 Jun 2014 10:11:37 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme2.itn.ftgroup (unknown []) by (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id A6EDB35C048; Fri, 6 Jun 2014 10:11:37 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from OPEXCLILM23.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([]) by OPEXCLILH02.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0181.006; Fri, 6 Jun 2014 10:11:37 +0200
From: <>
To: Ted Lemon <>, Brian E Carpenter <>
Thread-Topic: [Int-area] [ietf-privacy] NAT Reveal / Host Identifiers
Thread-Index: AQHPgQTaDm6yLULEn0WY6FQhphp6qZtjuHew
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2014 08:11:37 +0000
Message-ID: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93300141B4@OPEXCLILM23.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
References: <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-PMX-Version:, Antispam-Engine:, Antispam-Data: 2014.6.6.70018
Cc: "" <>, "" <>
Subject: Re: [ietf-privacy] [Int-area] NAT Reveal / Host Identifiers
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: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 08:11:52 -0000

Hi Ted,

As far as this document is concerned, we are open to address technical concerns. It will be helpful if these concerns are specific enough and hopefully in reference to

Adding a discussion on potential misuses can be considered to address the comment from Stephen if those are not redundant with the text already in  


>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : Int-area [] De la part de Ted Lemon
>Envoyé : jeudi 5 juin 2014 23:27
>À : Brian E Carpenter
>Cc :;; Stephen Farrell
>Objet : Re: [Int-area] [ietf-privacy] NAT Reveal / Host Identifiers
>On Jun 5, 2014, at 4:28 PM, Brian E Carpenter <>
>> I have to call you on that. WG adoption is not approval. It's agreement
>> to work on a topic. It is not OK to attempt a pocket veto on adoption
>> because you don't like the existing content.
>WG adoption is a pretty heavy action.   It states that the WG has consensus
>to work on the document, and weighs heavily in the consensus evaluation
>during WGLC.   If there are problems with the document, part of the
>adoption process should be the identification of those flaws and an
>agreement to address them.   So bringing up those flaws during the adoption
>process is crucial to the process.
>It's also worth noting that the INTAREA working group is a special working
>group, with an extremely broad charter, which is moderated by the fact that
>in order for work to be done by the working group, the Internet Area ADs
>have to approve the work.
>So needless to say I at least am watching keenly to see if Stephen's
>objections are being addressed, and likely won't approve the adoption of
>the work if they aren't.
>Int-area mailing list