Re: [OPSAWG] WG LC: draft-ietf-opsawg-finding-geofeeds

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Tue, 02 February 2021 00:36 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.com>
X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 174523A15F8; Mon, 1 Feb 2021 16:36:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 h01dSYueWLPK; Mon, 1 Feb 2021 16:36:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (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 472123A15F7; Mon, 1 Feb 2021 16:36:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.rg.net) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1l6jgH-0005F0-HB; Tue, 02 Feb 2021 00:36:33 +0000
Date: Mon, 01 Feb 2021 16:36:32 -0800
Message-ID: <m24kivfgq7.wl-randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Erik Kline <ek.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: adrian@olddog.co.uk, Ops Area WG <opsawg@ietf.org>, opsawg-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-opsawg-finding-geofeeds@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <CAMGpriVLv2g1TFV_Wr8KvTKbqS03am3xf2PvhvAaqF=HVn8HeQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <06bf01d6f884$18acfd10$4a06f730$@olddog.co.uk> <m2h7mvfv0p.wl-randy@psg.com> <075b01d6f8d8$c189db70$449d9250$@olddog.co.uk> <CAMGpriVLv2g1TFV_Wr8KvTKbqS03am3xf2PvhvAaqF=HVn8HeQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/26.3 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsawg/qaxmBRDOu-wp-4K3QwgLBkKyxuM>
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] WG LC: draft-ietf-opsawg-finding-geofeeds
X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <opsawg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/opsawg/>
List-Post: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2021 00:36:41 -0000

>> 8805 was, of course, an Independent Stream production. So I carry as much
>> responsibility as anyone else for the lack of privacy discussion. But, more
>> significantly, I am entirely responsible for not having noted section 4 of
>> RFC 8805 when I wrote my email - oops.
> 
> Yeah, I was pretty sure we had written something.  =)
> 
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8805.html#name-privacy-considerations

and i am guilty of not rereading 8805

may i suggest that finding-geofeeds merely say

   All the privacy considerations of RFC8804 Section 4 apply to this
   document.

saves a lot of words thereby reducing the rfc editor fee.

randy