Re: Admission Control to the IETF 78 and IETF 79 Networks

["Richard L. Barnes" <[e-mail]>]

Is there a reason that the anonymous IDs are opt-in?  Why not have all  
the IDs be anonymous?




On Jul 1, 2010, at 3:20 PM, Russ Housley wrote:

> Iljitsch:
>
>>> This is useful, but not quite what I was asking.  Clearly, the above
>>> means that the logs exist during the meeting, while we are at the  
>>> host
>>> venue.  I think it is safe to say that under some legal regimes, a
>>> government could require the delivery of such existing logs to them.
>>
>> I would very much appreciate assurances that such logging will not  
>> occur,
>> and that there will be no "live" feed of such information to third
> parties,
>> such as government or law enforcement.
>>
>> A week's worth of correlation between my MAC address and the IP  
>> addresses
>> that I exchange encrypted information with is not something I think  
>> any
>> government needs to have.
>>
>> Of course if a government has cause to believe that a given user is
>> misbehaving they still have the option to talk to the NOC staff and
>> have them obtain information about this user.
>
> As I said in my reply to Andrew, no matter where a meeting is held, we
> are subject to the laws of that location.  Nothing new there.
>
> We have received no requests for the kind of "live" feeds that you
> suggest.  I'm quite sure that the NOC Team and the IAOC would push  
> back
> is such a request were made.
>
> Again, the use of anonymous registration IDs is available to you and
> anyone that wants one.  If you are concerned about the logs, then you
> should use one.
>
> Russ
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf