Re: Comments on <draft-cooper-privacy-policy-01.txt>

Dave CROCKER <dhc2@dcrocker.net> Mon, 12 July 2010 16:12 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc2@dcrocker.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00E7B3A69D4 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Jul 2010 09:12:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.193
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.193 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.406, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1FodDxbIt66G for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Jul 2010 09:12:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D070E3A6992 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Jul 2010 09:12:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.142] (ppp-68-122-72-44.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [68.122.72.44]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o6CGCdHa019960 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 12 Jul 2010 09:12:44 -0700
Message-ID: <4C3B3EF5.1090501@dcrocker.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 09:12:37 -0700
From: Dave CROCKER <dhc2@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.4) Gecko/20100608 Thunderbird/3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
Subject: Re: Comments on <draft-cooper-privacy-policy-01.txt>
References: <7022DEA1-7FC0-4D77-88CE-FA3788720B43@cdt.org> <47076F01-CC4C-45E6-803E-8E2516BE15AC@gmail.com> <20100709113224.123900@gmx.net> <4C3A0C74.4080504@dcrocker.net> <4C3B2C5B.1040702@bogus.com>
In-Reply-To: <4C3B2C5B.1040702@bogus.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Mon, 12 Jul 2010 09:12:44 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 16:12:39 -0000

On 7/12/2010 7:53 AM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> On 7/11/10 11:24 AM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
>> Has "the IETF" been authorizing people to conduct human subjects research
>> without the informed consent of the subjects?
>
> I'm going to insert the root trust anchor into our recursive nameservers for
>  this meeting. For obvious reasons this will be the first time that this have
>  every been done at an IETF meeting.
>
> Do I require the informed consent of the ietf participants to do that or
> should I just chalk it up to tinkering?


One view that is expressed in this thread is that folks will generally know to
make reasonable choices.

The nature of your question suggests that, indeed, we need to be quite a bit
more clear about what it is that requires consent and what doesn't.  I would
have thought that the difference between human subjects research versus network
management functionality changes would be pretty obvious.  But what's obvious is
that it isn't.

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net