IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Pearg] wg adoption of draft-giuliano-blocking-considerations

Shivan Kaul Sahib <shivankaulsahib@gmail.com> Thu, 21 July 2022 06:59 UTC

Return-Path: <shivankaul.1993@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: pearg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pearg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4229C147930 for <pearg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jul 2022 23:59:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.854
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.854 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, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MFl7C_mbz3_U for <pearg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Jul 2022 23:59:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pj1-x1029.google.com (mail-pj1-x1029.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1029]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 28604C14CF10 for <pearg@irtf.org>; Wed, 20 Jul 2022 23:59:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pj1-x1029.google.com with SMTP id p6-20020a17090a680600b001f2267a1c84so2647641pjj.5 for <pearg@irtf.org>; Wed, 20 Jul 2022 23:59:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=/2EkGppunTd6TGDYKSnKYOzt/AjBqm0IOOOyLy2lNbk=; b=galC1ZtUYMKoeRCveQRa15hFNxZwYGJ6qtVaaWOZZZsNNJbcIEbomVyvDiW4Nw/xz4 j0WJXbtohwClRicPYgMV1gVmww9a0gF5H6PQSt1g9WP0C9evLlJs8S5FvGha5TqGdN8A zXi65bFzY/ALbRylCqrWM85dRnbfpxxt0ABH8epDl2K1XCrfKXIaMnyudIPsd/pFnjsI J51q5CqFK1arhyDvW/NvXVU1HzN555DDuLMyU4e2p0ZlIQdU/Kg3fpL7M9krghsaFESE veeQKTR9VXL4nB9L5Tb68Ojfiak8twqWrO0s+L1cL1R3BfxYDoOyzWGg6QMll0MbVhRR nSXw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=/2EkGppunTd6TGDYKSnKYOzt/AjBqm0IOOOyLy2lNbk=; b=jxqSSuHVk0IiRLWiAU5e2gKZXlvluy5nt4UmWQeSRetd15DKr/P9EtSeFmhF3eexgB lW2MdvYzXOQv3IS0j5WLebenJ8Uby6tXwCmPUrnwjn+oR2ezOKUM7Mfbrw8ehecEEl0U g6hBOC8WPWZeV1wn3UsQv+g3ha7ZzDvTIMXaz7YFG6Jnvf6rugijVgp//AAw3e6plsun UzDlF5A+c6GSeTTDzQ7khgcH7l2CJot6e2QWXqvUcHNghFVBm8QDI3/ND3VdCn9YAvHJ C9taH0tmF6azDG76pqPVhoKRwLTZ3J37QjhfuNHp8V4X3JC3vJqEZDIziE0hBDJCSjSV dAnA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora//1V6bP4NHP/2mFQTOcrQz3/CINpaTioOGOY55v944f8qd9Cun B1QEjTImaFFQsXs8xQhB6IscRpVc6zJvUEb/yv9AuzyJ
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1s9dtvj3FWdurRnFXx6O0SOCv5fe2I+HPkMrjkVAaP0fOd1GqgJNqU5zpUs8Dsy5GPoNJGwHSxAp66SRFS27sU=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:d544:b0:16b:d981:5c2e with SMTP id z4-20020a170902d54400b0016bd9815c2emr41308351plf.22.1658386792457; Wed, 20 Jul 2022 23:59:52 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.2207190935350.29130@mail.lenny.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.2207190935350.29130@mail.lenny.net>
From: Shivan Kaul Sahib <shivankaulsahib@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2022 23:59:16 -0700
Message-ID: <CAG3f7MjxwKHpjhpqcJ9gYuXwpjHzq47q5qDVuSVz7J4zk1h6QQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lenny Giuliano <lenny@lenny.net>
Cc: pearg@irtf.org, tony.li@tony.li
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000aa2c5705e44b4398"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pearg/pxrDfbyMOJXs2O3UgYsz09nBFx0>
Subject: Re: [Pearg] wg adoption of draft-giuliano-blocking-considerations
X-BeenThere: pearg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Privacy Enhancements and Assessment Proposed RG <pearg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/pearg>, <mailto:pearg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pearg/>
List-Post: <mailto:pearg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pearg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/pearg>, <mailto:pearg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2022 06:59:57 -0000

Hi,

On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 at 06:40, Lenny Giuliano <lenny@lenny.net> wrote:

>
> <Sorry for cross-posting, but wasn't sure if HRPC or PEARG was the more
> appropriate WG>
>
> In IETF113, we presented draft-giuliano-blocking-considerations-00 in HRPC
> (as well as in int-area).  The purpose of this draft is to document the
> well-known approaches for blocking the Internet connectivity of
> regions/nations (eg, for the purpose of sanction).  This doc does not
> advocate for/against such a policy, but rather explains what is
> technically possible, how it might work, how effective it might/might not
> be and what might be the potential intended/unintended consequences. This
> doc is intended to provide sober, unbiased information for those who do
> advocate/implement such policies- a "read this first before taking action"
> document to help inform a policy-maker when deciding whether such a policy
> is a good idea or not.


> In HRPC in Vienna, there seemed to be some interest in this work in some
> form. One suggestion was to add parts of it to
> draft-irtf-pearg-censorship, but looks like that train has left the
> station.  Another option would be adopt this draft in HRPC or PEARG.


As you noted, this sounds very similar to draft censorship which recently
passed RGLC. So for now, I don't think PEARG would be a good fit. Once
draft-censorship is published, PEARG could consider a new document that
expands upon the same topic, if there are meaningful differences and if the
framing fits within the charter.

>
> Looking at the charters of each, HRPC seems like a better fit (albeit,
> more "deployment considerations" than "protocol considerations") but we're
> fairly new to both WGs.
>
> Here's a link to the draft. Comments and suggestions for next steps would
> be most welcome:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-giuliano-blocking-considerations/
>
> --
> Pearg mailing list
> Pearg@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/pearg
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email