IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Hum theatre

Stefan Winter <stefan.winter@restena.lu> Thu, 07 November 2013 09:27 UTC

Return-Path: <stefan.winter@restena.lu>
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 8E61511E8114 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Nov 2013 01:27:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, WEIRD_PORT=0.001]
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 OQuz5nYzsY4l for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Nov 2013 01:27:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtprelay.restena.lu (smtprelay.restena.lu [IPv6:2001:a18:1::62]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE04C11E80FE for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Nov 2013 01:27:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtprelay.restena.lu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtprelay.restena.lu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0998C10584 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Nov 2013 10:27:16 +0100 (CET)
Received: from aragorn.restena.lu (aragorn.restena.lu [IPv6:2001:a18:1:8::155]) by smtprelay.restena.lu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CD3AC10580 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Nov 2013 10:27:15 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <527B5CF2.70906@restena.lu>
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2013 10:27:14 +0100
From: Stefan Winter <stefan.winter@restena.lu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Hum theatre
References: <527AF986.4090504@dcrocker.net> <A4E8A2D6-6F01-48DF-84D9-84CD53FCE76A@cisco.com> <CADnDZ8-YzFaY1hi82CPTrAPZ=T+YOjeSOFts+Li5nK1qLwt4Xg@mail.gmail.com> <9E6F8E49-8A45-43C7-BF83-AE9B25C50076@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <9E6F8E49-8A45-43C7-BF83-AE9B25C50076@cisco.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
OpenPGP: id=8A39DC66; url=http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xC0DE6A358A39DC66
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="6iBQVUbxXlWd5HUVB27sIqCGGWwimk1Uv"
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Thu, 07 Nov 2013 09:27:17 -0000

Hi,

> There are two fundamental reasons. One is that we didn't recognize the
> issues at the time. The other, in the words of an RFC author who looked
> me (as IETF Chair) in the eye while I was demanding a reasonable
> security considerations discussion in his draft, is "my customers will
> not pay for the extra enhancements and effort that go into a secure
> solution."

And the reply was, of course, that he was forced to do it anyway before
publication could happen, because the IETF cares about the standards,
and not hypothesized customer complaints made up by an individual
participant. Right?

Greetings,

Stefan Winter

-- 
Stefan WINTER
Ingenieur de Recherche
Fondation RESTENA - Réseau Téléinformatique de l'Education Nationale et
de la Recherche
6, rue Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi
L-1359 Luxembourg

Tel: +352 424409 1
Fax: +352 422473

PGP key updated to 4096 Bit RSA - I will encrypt all mails if the
recipient's key is known to me

http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xC0DE6A358A39DC66

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email