IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Proposed Proposed Statement on e-mail encryption at the IETF

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Tue, 02 June 2015 18:11 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF5AC1B2F93 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jun 2015 11:11:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.347
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.347 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id s6bPNOLu7zFa for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jun 2015 11:11:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from proper.com (Opus1.Proper.COM [207.182.41.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8339B1B2F79 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Jun 2015 11:11:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.20.30.109] (142-254-17-100.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [142.254.17.100]) (authenticated bits=0) by proper.com (8.15.1/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id t52IBoMc093425 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 2 Jun 2015 11:11:51 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: hoffman.proper.com: Host 142-254-17-100.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com [142.254.17.100] claimed to be [10.20.30.109]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2098\))
Subject: Re: Proposed Proposed Statement on e-mail encryption at the IETF
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAMm+Lwj+WKDF7w2YpLm0AVm2qCRPnCtxzNbGy+paVh-QDSJpVA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2015 11:12:01 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <D419A999-27FD-40E9-B51A-95A1B12EA7D2@vpnc.org>
References: <DD88F4E4-6BBA-4610-BB49-3158A26DF55B@hopcount.ca> <2DA10E34-02DA-4245-9031-8C0F2749461D@vpnc.org> <CAMm+Lwj+WKDF7w2YpLm0AVm2qCRPnCtxzNbGy+paVh-QDSJpVA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2098)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/XLTrLX9NFQyMF4_jBS0SBjlf2mY>
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
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: Tue, 02 Jun 2015 18:11:57 -0000

On Jun 2, 2015, at 11:03 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> wrote:
> Well I think the original point here is 'eat the dog food'

We fully disagree that that was the "original point". The original point was that encrypted email from the IETF is good. Joe specifically requested that we not get into a dogfood discussion so that he doesn't fall off his chair.

--Paul Hoffman

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email