Re: [Fwd: I-D Action: draft-carpenter-prismatic-reflections-00.txt]

[Hannes Tschofenig <[e-mail]>]

Hi Masataka,

On 20.09.2013 16:06, Masataka Ohta wrote:
> (2013/09/20 21:15), Jari Arkko wrote:
>> Josh, Stephen,
>>
>> It is important to understand the limitations of technology in this
>> discussion. We can improve communications security, and in some
>> cases reduce the amount information communicated. But we cannot
>> help a situation where you are communicating with a party that
>> you cannot entirely trust with technology alone.
> 
> We can discourage people communicating with a party that are
> under full control of USG, which is why using cloud services
> should be discouraged, which is a technical issue.

An open standardization process means that everyone can participate,
including people who work for the government (directly or indirectly).
Whether you like what someone is putting forward is a completely
different story but I hope you would at least look at the content before
judging it.

So, I believe this attitude against people and companies who may have
had, or still have relationships with governments is counterproductive.

On your argument against cloud standardization in the IETF I have two
remarks, namely :

* Cloud services (with whatever definition you use) indeed presents
challenges for privacy and security.

* There is no standardization in the IETF on something like the "cloud".
On the other hand  I have to say that almost every protocol we
standardize in the IETF could be used in a cloud service. For example,
many cloud services use HTTP. Should we stop working on HTTP?

Ciao
Hannes


> 
> 						Masataka Ohta