RE: Future Handling of Blue Sheets

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Sat, 16 June 2012 01:59 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64B0221F854B for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 18:59:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.439
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.439 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.160, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id q2gWMT-tKFSZ for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 18:59:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (asmtp5.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.176]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DC2421F8549 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 18:59:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q5G1xWBk024211 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 16 Jun 2012 02:59:32 +0100
Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q5G1xVwc024201 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 16 Jun 2012 02:59:32 +0100
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: 'IETF' <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <97BB17A56A65B20E9FB38128@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <360B33DF-0603-4B86-B488-DDDBEDF2B10B@bbn.com> <64D096E2-78E1-4B4F-B227-42AB7B658FF6@cs.columbia.edu> <BE62B481-1FBD-4F82-92BA-EAC0D0519639@ietf.org> <D21AF73E-AC26-4ED7-9A85-2F4B6246E238@ietf.org> <F9874821-601D-4655-AB91-C648AC10E49D@standardstrack.com> <616737881-1339796556-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-133583724-@b2.c2.bise6.blackberry>
In-Reply-To: <616737881-1339796556-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-133583724-@b2.c2.bise6.blackberry>
Subject: RE: Future Handling of Blue Sheets
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2012 02:59:29 +0100
Message-ID: <0c1e01cd4b63$ab0f6210$012e2630$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQHY9tDIdSVp+arZNGQzvi7tw/09QgLe/LnYAn76fjYDMzbM3QJTH6vMAumV0ikCKMeXEpZlI+jQ
Content-Language: en-gb
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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: Sat, 16 Jun 2012 01:59:38 -0000

I've always found that term in that context highly presumptuous and slightly
offensive.

Adrian

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> edj.etc@gmail.com
> Sent: 15 June 2012 22:43
> To: Eric Burger; ietf-bounces@ietf.org; IETF Chair
> Cc: IETF
> Subject: Re: Future Handling of Blue Sheets
> 
> I presume it is the same data that people input into the "Organization" field
when
> they register for the meeting.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Ed  J.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Burger <eburger-l@standardstrack.com>
> Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
> Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 17:37:50
> To: IETF Chair<chair@ietf.org>
> Cc: IETF<ietf@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: Future Handling of Blue Sheets
> 
> Do we have guidelines as to what is an "organization affiliation"?
> 
> On Jun 14, 2012, at 5:26 PM, IETF Chair wrote:
> 
> > Two things have occurred since the message below as sent to the IETF mail
list.
> First, we got a lawyer in Europe to do some investigation, and the inclusion
of the
> email address on the blue sheet will lead to trouble with the European privacy
> laws.  Second, Ted Hardie suggested that we could require a password to access
> the scanned blue sheet.
> >
> > Based on the European privacy law information, the use of email will result
in a
> major burden.  If the email address is used, then we must provide a way for
> people to ask for their email address to be remove at any time in the future,
> even if we got prior approval to include it.  Therefore, I suggest that we
collect
> organization affiliation to discriminate between multiple people with the same
> name instead of email address.
> >
> > Based on Ted's suggestion, I checked with the Secretariat about using a
> datatracker login to download the scanned blue sheet.  This is fairly easy to
do,
> once the community tracking tools are deployed.  However, with the removal of
> the email addresses from the blue sheets, it is unclear that there is any
further
> need for password protection of these images.  Therefore, I suggest that we
> proceed without password protection for the blue sheet images.
> >
> > Here is a summary of the suggested way forward:
> >
> > - Stop collecting email addresses on blue sheets;
> >
> > - Collect organization affiliation to discriminate between multiple people
with
> the same name;
> >
> > - Scan the blue sheets and include the images in the proceedings for the WG
> session;
> >
> > - Add indication to top of the blue sheet so people know it will be part of
the
> proceedings; and
> >
> > - Discard paper blue sheets after scanning.
> >
> > Russ
> >
> >
> > On May 6, 2012, at 12:46 PM, IETF Chair wrote:
> >
> >> We have heard from many community participants, and consensus is quite
> rough on this topic.  The IESG discussed this thread and reached two
conclusions:
> >>
> >> (1) Rough consensus: an open and transparent standards process is more
> important to the IETF than privacy of blue sheet information.
> >>
> >> (2) Rough consensus: inclusion of email addresses is a good way to
distinguish
> participants with the same or similar names.
> >>
> >>
> >> Based on these conclusions, the plan is to handle blue sheets as follows:
> >>
> >> - Continue to collect email addresses on blue sheets;
> >>
> >> - Scan the blue sheet and include the image in the proceedings for the WG
> session;
> >>
> >> - Add indication to top of the blue sheet so people know it will be part of
the
> proceedings; and
> >>
> >> - Discard paper blue sheets after scanning.
> >>
> >>
> >> On behalf of the IESG,
> >> Russ
> >>
> >