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

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

Hiya,

On 15/06/14 19:38, S Moonesamy wrote:
> 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.
> 
> Ok.
> 
>> 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]
>> draft.)
> 
> In theory a (future) RFC can be added to BCP 162.  In practice people
> won't read it or miss it.

Possibly fair point, but OTOH BCP10 and others consist of >1 RFC
and work. For now at least, I'd concentrate on how to the get the
new privacy-friendly stuff agreed, rather than worry too much as
to how its represented in RFC(s).

> 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.

Who knows? I would agree that the intarea is probably not a hotbed
of privacy activists. But its also equally true that folks on that
list are probably as clueful as here, and so may well have quite a
good appreciation of how privacy is more important than previously.

So I'd say give it a whirl if you've the energy to write an I-D and
fwiw I'll try push forward with good work regardless of how its
locally received in one or another IETF WG (no matter the relevant
WG is an area-wg). But, equally, I'm not interested in helping with
work on things that haven't even tried to be run by the best list
of relevant/interested folks. I do get that that's not a very clear
distinction (sorry:-) but I hope it helps, and regardless am happy
to chat more, on and/or off list.

Cheers,
S.


> 
> Regards,
> S. Moonesamy
> 
> 1. https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/intarea/
> 
>