Re: [Isms] ISMS charter broken- onus should be on WG to fix it

Michael Thomas <mat@cisco.com> Thu, 15 September 2005 00:32 UTC

Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EFhfn-00087Q-GK; Wed, 14 Sep 2005 20:32:19 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EFhfj-00087F-VN; Wed, 14 Sep 2005 20:32:18 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA22420; Wed, 14 Sep 2005 20:32:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com ([171.71.176.71] helo=sj-iport-2.cisco.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EFhkQ-0005Sc-KN; Wed, 14 Sep 2005 20:37:07 -0400
Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com ([171.71.177.237]) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 14 Sep 2005 17:32:05 -0700
Received: from imail.cisco.com (imail.cisco.com [128.107.200.91]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id j8F0W24u022753; Wed, 14 Sep 2005 17:32:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [171.71.192.77] (dhcp-171-71-192-77.cisco.com [171.71.192.77]) by imail.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j8F0iZfI008836; Wed, 14 Sep 2005 17:44:35 -0700
Message-ID: <4328C102.2010201@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 17:32:02 -0700
From: Michael Thomas <mat@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040913 Thunderbird/0.8 Mnenhy/0.7.2.0
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>
References: <200509131506.j8DF664A016810@pacific-carrier-annex.mit.edu> <tslhdcokeed.fsf@cz.mit.edu> <20050913204555.GA14153@boskop.local> <tslbr2wk78f.fsf@cz.mit.edu> <3C03BDBD60783D559EDAE652@sirius.fac.cs.cmu.edu> <01LSZP7AGR0Y000092@mauve.mrochek.com> <432886C4.9040606@cisco.com> <01LT0ZC5UEV8000092@mauve.mrochek.com>
In-Reply-To: <01LT0ZC5UEV8000092@mauve.mrochek.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; l=853; t=1126745075; x=1127177275; c=nowsp; s=nebraska; h=Subject:From:Date:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; d=cisco.com; i=mat@cisco.com; z=Subject:Re=3A=20[Isms]=20ISMS=20charter=20broken-=20onus=20should=20be=20on=20WG =20to=20fix=20it| From:Michael=20Thomas=20<mat@cisco.com>| Date:Wed,=2014=20Sep=202005=2017=3A32=3A02=20-0700| Content-Type:text/plain=3B=20charset=3DISO-8859-1=3B=20format=3Dflowed| Content-Transfer-Encoding:7bit; b=CNiujVWXNBOFZHJ97kvlChyfXg8MYDB2zH1Z/NccSqARbjLyOXtFEn1vpaXdXrx9QpwlJp7J tU4SJVexHkc+zOobR80cBHJ3BcW8YN2ESBBPrbISMJsKmPf2y9TlWPassa468UMO4ldu+95CfZ8 k0hsbXjZ6HCCtQwPqMrdFW1E=
Authentication-Results: imail.cisco.com; header.From=mat@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( message from cisco.com verified; );
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 8abaac9e10c826e8252866cbe6766464
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: david.kessens@nokia.com, isms@ietf.org, 'IETF Discussion' <ietf@ietf.org>, 'Eliot Lear' <lear@cisco.com>, ietfdbh@comcast.net, Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>, iesg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Isms] ISMS charter broken- onus should be on WG to fix it
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

Ned Freed wrote:
>> Ned Freed wrote:
>> > If I were to object to Eliot's proposal (I don't - in fact I strongly
>> > support
>> > it), it would be on the grounds that the IETF should be taking a long
>> > hard look
>> > at the issues surrounding call home in general, not just in the special
>> > case of
>> > SNMP.
> 
> 
>> I'll bite: what could the IETF do if it looked
>> long and hard?
> 
> 
> Well, the one approach that immediately comes to mind is that the 
> introduction
> of a third party might provide a means of getting timely information about
> software updates without sacrificing user privacy.
> 
> Such a third party would act as a repository for update information 
> provided by
> vendors. Applications would then "call home" to one of these repositories
> rather than directly to the vendor. Various anonymyzing tricks could be
> employed to minimize information leakage even if the third party was
> compromised.

You mean we could invent Bitorrent? :)

		Mike, doesn't it strike others as odd
		 that ietf is completely outside of the
		 p2p bizness?

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf