IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ohttp] Discovery

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Fri, 25 June 2021 07:39 UTC

Return-Path: <mnot@mnot.net>
X-Original-To: ohttp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ohttp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F9873A3F33 for <ohttp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 00:39:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mnot.net header.b=uxJY3Haa; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=KVQuKsRi
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 ez6JHqiDr7bX for <ohttp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 00:39:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 798453A3F34 for <ohttp@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 00:39:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8250E32004ED; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 03:39:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 25 Jun 2021 03:39:01 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm3; bh=X qohfrNrFnshvrgJEur7jGesuxiiXsk48DPyJRMjuNM=; b=uxJY3Haa29vPyz1PR LZ3DHdLWsA2yp15uCSUXHGujILzyjO97Wwc/9FYJGDX6oZHQ3i93emfwGy3wClUh dajNzqM0YbVujtdunYID02q77MTMLN+qHxb84SUw+eHIxrixJUljyKIlksRMBJ4b lxY1zm6WaSuB5NU5D10rvvMQ0uaKBUJgp4odRBS8TMlwIR/T/hSNjG2JTAYQ3+bk gwWZFbs2d14kSZXWRlPMAmuMoX2mAByD0Ww6eYONTvImZErkenA7613LsahZy+3w Swg/PXbNlk/knc32zqHrCpWFjYjMO+lJjIuVO8NCuBW1FYAMfSy0VOABsm9mdypC UOpUA==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=XqohfrNrFnshvrgJEur7jGesuxiiXsk48DPyJRMju NM=; b=KVQuKsRi3YEhevNHpWhrUi0cHZD3DddTGxX7IuHgh/ZwnX5cdZn+bA9ru CIDRekl0PhLf5zbjhvov7RnRp/1Aii3L9GfCFwJvydq9cINkjvwa3a0txCcNJvZY 8kaA3HCeW/fMPVXPZjSL56nCxSlLS4a1H4iFjCupbof2rDAv+VvK1IRl+FTyRrlg RVqtYMSXJtBaaLpO4kFW6Rou8Ozkc/QjYRgMerGV04D6uXWQttNRTU0TzP20mfZV gSadrwmL3deI4wevyggtoe4t/ISKt2+9HCjmSp/n+OBCchrIYL3Ei8Puog7cNMck UP5eRKrXsJ8mL1zcedrCaM1tLV69w==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:E4jVYFUpzqRk8u_jAOYyRjJ3ZBv1DrPgBsjlC71ANGnRz-SDSepoEg> <xme:E4jVYFkTPH1-qwn_8c_5qxGK26LWhwjZi3z0nnPKsSIZ6EWp6NuwEnprNXixpKKtx NjRPB3TiVC-7b9A_Q>
X-ME-Received: <xmr:E4jVYBaLYkdfbTXi6N65tP0zMr9KS50FbC1YOGikm2hfb2786O-hfSKEpN18Lh7arhptBGeIf6Fz7vOsYkaE_-oxTAvVb8p0VwupUgzjRwYxgyLaD7zT7K7X>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrfeegiedguddvfecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpegtggfuhfgjfffgkfhfvffosehtqhhmtdhhtddvnecuhfhrohhmpeforghr khcupfhothhtihhnghhhrghmuceomhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnhgvtheqnecuggftrfgrth htvghrnhepvefffffhudetveevhfeuffeigedtuedtheffleetffeftddtgeegjeehieeu teetnecuffhomhgrihhnpehmnhhothdrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtne curfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmnhhothesmhhnohhtrdhnvght
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:E4jVYIVoFn8sbT4-dD_tQFsBN5dr_h_Gc5R6HxCSGoT3n3Ky64Ve-Q> <xmx:E4jVYPnCUSvMDy4gbsUIhQS0NknsDp0SFF7dnkKid64uO6LqboS-Jg> <xmx:E4jVYFdWbhNeIFsIBxxdmoGuwgfN-Qh9y8uIQXHhbbYknUFwLbPIaA> <xmx:FYjVYIDusM93U3j9zDsOdDJ08SbP1p5DV18Peyv10XFwP8llpQL29Q>
Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 25 Jun 2021 03:38:58 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.100.0.2.22\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <f1308d19-085d-dadf-df69-da6f8b1b5171@lear.ch>
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2021 17:38:55 +1000
Cc: Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>, ohttp@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <85F35B48-DAB9-4429-9538-625E03262CDE@mnot.net>
References: <D8268CF8-94DA-4E91-9286-4E45B8E26CB6@mnot.net> <c57ed5b0-c17a-0bca-f42a-dafaa1725792@lear.ch> <1F7246CE-589A-4B34-B514-AFA0F640A384@mnot.net> <238476f4-6bf9-4124-8146-e8c051b1b25f@www.fastmail.com> <f1308d19-085d-dadf-df69-da6f8b1b5171@lear.ch>
To: Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.100.0.2.22)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ohttp/666IjIJgwtwj7J7s4kgaOLUgouc>
Subject: Re: [Ohttp] Discovery
X-BeenThere: ohttp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Oblivious HTTP <ohttp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ohttp>, <mailto:ohttp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ohttp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ohttp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ohttp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ohttp>, <mailto:ohttp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2021 07:39:08 -0000

Eliot,

On 19 Jun 2021, at 12:25 am, Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch> wrote:
> 
> += The working group will consider and address operational matters, so that the output does not introduce any substantial negative impact to existing deployments.

This is a very Russell's Teapot kind of requirement; quantifying that there is no 'substantial negative impact to existing deployments' is a massive undertaking, considering the size of the Internet.

It's also loading a lot into 'operational matters'; the language seems to automatically prioritise them over any other concern engaged by the work. That seems deeply problematic to me; if we're going to prioritise anything, it should not be that. 

Lastly, it is effectively applying the Precautionary Principle to our work. While I strongly support the idea of being more careful and thoughtful in our actions, this is a 180 degree turn for the IETF, and I don't believe it's got the balance right to say that we must be certain there's no harm to a specific constituency to proceed.

Martin's proposal is much more reasonable. 

Cheers,


--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email