Re: Blue Sheet Change Proposal

Eric Rescorla <ekr@networkresonance.com> Fri, 04 April 2008 19:10 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D0B128C1C0; Fri, 4 Apr 2008 12:10:35 -0700 (PDT)
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 8190D28C1C0; Fri, 4 Apr 2008 12:10:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.459
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.459 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.036, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
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 fKCaI2MvxMzH; Fri, 4 Apr 2008 12:10:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from romeo.rtfm.com (unknown [74.95.2.173]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28F1C28C75D; Fri, 4 Apr 2008 12:06:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from romeo.rtfm.com (localhost.rtfm.com [127.0.0.1]) by romeo.rtfm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA46E5081A; Fri, 4 Apr 2008 12:08:12 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2008 12:08:12 -0700
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@networkresonance.com>
To: Michael Thomas <mat@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Blue Sheet Change Proposal
In-Reply-To: <47F64FFE.9020701@cisco.com>
References: <20080404001012.31E33843A22@newdev.eecs.harvard.edu> <20080404004447.1103E5081A@romeo.rtfm.com> <47F64FFE.9020701@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) Emacs/21.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka")
Message-Id: <20080404190812.AA46E5081A@romeo.rtfm.com>
Cc: wgchairs@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, "Scott O. Bradner" <sob@harvard.edu>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.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://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

At Fri, 04 Apr 2008 08:57:50 -0700,
Michael Thomas wrote:
> 
> Eric Rescorla wrote:
> > At Thu,  3 Apr 2008 20:10:12 -0400 (EDT),
> > Scott O. Bradner wrote:
> >   
> >> Ole guessed
> >>     
> >>> My understanding is that the blue sheet serves mainly as a record of 
> >>> "who was in the room" which I think is largely used to plan room 
> >>> capacities for the next meeting.
> >>>       
> >> the "blue sheets" are required as part of the basic openness  
> >> process in a standards organization - there is a need to know 
> >> "who is in the room" (see RFC 2418 section 3.1 for the actual
> >> requirement)
> >>
> >> the blue sheets become part of the formal record of the standards
> >> process and can be retrieved if needed (e.g. in a lawsuit) but are not
> >> generally made available 
> >>
> >> as pointed out by Mark Andrews - email addresses can be useful in 
> >> determining the actual identity of the person who scrawled their 
> >> name on the sheet - so it is an advantage to retain them
> >>
> >> I'm trying to understand how the blue sheets contribute in any
> >> significant way to the spam problem - someone whould have to be 
> >> surreptitiously copying  them or quickly writing down the email 
> >> addresses - both could happen but do not seem to be all that 
> >> likely there are far more efficient ways to grab email addresses
> >>
> >> so, my question is "is this a problem that needs solving"?
> >>     
> >
> > The only reason I've heard is that some claim that people don't
> > write their names on the blue sheets out of concern over spam.
> >   
> This doesn't seem very reasonable to me... if you post on any public
> list -- like this one -- your likelihood for harvest is far, far higher. 
> Let's
> face it, in 2008 trying to have "private" email addresses as a spam defense
> strategy is oh so 1998.

Oh, I agree.

My only argument here would be that if people actually do this in
significant numbers that accomodating them might be easier than
educating them.

-Ekr

_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf