IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Last Call: Recognising RFC1984 as a BCP

John Curran <jcurran@istaff.org> Thu, 20 August 2015 15:17 UTC

Return-Path: <jcurran@istaff.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 214B51ACEC4 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Aug 2015 08:17:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham
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 NbRL3BDakzM0 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Aug 2015 08:17:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pmta2.delivery5.ore.mailhop.org (pmta2.delivery5.ore.mailhop.org [54.186.218.12]) (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 4D82D1ACEE7 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Aug 2015 08:17:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.200.107] (unknown [98.252.11.61]) by outbound2.ore.mailhop.org (Halon Mail Gateway) with ESMTPSA; Thu, 20 Aug 2015 15:18:42 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2102\))
Subject: Re: Last Call: Recognising RFC1984 as a BCP
From: John Curran <jcurran@istaff.org>
In-Reply-To: <55D5E620.7080407@dcrocker.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 11:16:53 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <CADA0DE8-1577-48C8-A5CF-F37B6271E7DA@istaff.org>
References: <55CEF697.3090803@cisco.com> <20150815124944.99399.qmail@ary.lan> <20150815141051.GS30018@verdi> <55CFC5AA.1080107@gmail.com> <86B144B3-354D-4B8C-A366-3898E415559F@istaff.org> <55D5E620.7080407@dcrocker.net>
To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2102)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/YVDLBrTdfPB3S4icyajpoDH5mlI>
Cc: 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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 15:17:17 -0000

On Aug 20, 2015, at 10:37 AM, Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> wrote:
> 
> On 8/20/2015 7:24 AM, John Curran wrote:
>> but would note that (at least in my limited experience) law enforcement
>> activities (LEA) often seek supporting or corroborating information that is 
>> not  the direct communications of the alleged perpetrators.  E
> 
> 
> John, et al,
> 
> Technical work is best guided by substantive case analyses or, at least,
> documentation of a range of concrete, real-world details.  Having a
> general assertion, of the type you offer here, is useful as a starting
> point in discussion, but not as an ending point.
> 
> What is needed is followup that provides details that compose a serious
> and substantive case for the utility you describe.

Dave -

I imagine that the IETF will gather such as a result of their engagement
with the affected communities.

/John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email