Re: [privacydir] getting things started

Sean Turner <> Fri, 07 January 2011 21:13 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04F7E3A6946 for <>; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 13:13:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.541
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.541 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.057, BAYES_00=-2.599, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ysyNFCoB7T5f for <>; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 13:13:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with SMTP id 9527B3A68C5 for <>; Fri, 7 Jan 2011 13:13:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] by with NNFMP; 07 Jan 2011 21:15:24 -0000
Received: from [] by with NNFMP; 07 Jan 2011 21:15:24 -0000
Received: from [] by with NNFMP; 07 Jan 2011 21:15:24 -0000
Received: (qmail 16687 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2011 21:15:23 -0000
Received: from thunderfish.local (turners@ with plain) by with SMTP; 07 Jan 2011 13:15:22 -0800 PST
X-Yahoo-SMTP: ZrP3VLSswBDL75pF8ymZHDSu9B.vcMfDPgLJ
X-YMail-OSG: MgeCNWoVM1lGYNpVTiQKa9bl8LAVQ4KccxbqYG8slOfWK4h Wkl8-
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
Message-ID: <>
Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 16:15:21 -0500
From: Sean Turner <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv: Gecko/20101207 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Deirdre Mulligan <>
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [privacydir] getting things started
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Privacy Directorate to develop the concept of privacy considerations for IETF specifications and to review internet-drafts for privacy considerations." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 21:13:22 -0000

The two drafts below were on yesterday's IESG telechat.

For the ipfix-anon draft, I submitted Nick's comments pretty much in 
their entirety.  I haven't heard from the authors.  There's essentially 
still time if somebody uncovers something horrible.  The time frame for 
anything on that draft is at best two weeks.

For the cookie draft, time is short - actually technically it's over 
because IETF LC ended a while ago.  The author is very responsive too. 
If you've got any comments I need them as soon as possible and 
unfortunately there's no guarantee the author will incorporate them.

This just goes to show we need a secretary to ride herd on us.


On 1/6/11 1:58 PM, Deirdre Mulligan wrote:
> Hi Sean et al
> Can you tell me what the timeline is on the two below?
> I am happy to take on some of the evaluation work under 2 and will plan
> to work it into a lab class I am running this semester looking at policy
> implications of technical design.
> On topic 1, I would suggest that we think about other models--both
> decisional documents, expert committees, etc. -- in addition to the
> morris draft for iding and working through privacy issues in drafts.
> thanks and happy new year.
> cheers
> deirdre
> On 1/5/11 6:04 AM, Sean Turner wrote:
>> Everyone,
>> Thanks for agreeing to be in this directorate. The purpose is twofold:
>> 1. Provide a place to discuss the Privacy Considerations for Internet
>> Protocols draft
>> (
>> 2. Test out the recommendations in that draft by reviewing selected
>> drafts.
>> Most that I talked to about this directorate liked the idea that it
>> would be modeled on the security directorate. To do that we'll need a
>> secretary to review the upcoming IESG telechat agenda
>> (, select drafts to
>> review, and assign drafts to reviewers. What that means is that we'll
>> actually need people to review drafts and send their comments to the
>> directorate. The workload will, I think, at most be one draft a month
>> per person. Now there are only 15 or so, but we've had 30 requests to
>> join the directorate. So, the workload could actually drop.
>> I've gotten at least one recommendation for a secretary and Tim and I
>> will see if they'd be game. I suspect the assignment process will happen
>> by generating the list of directorate reviewers and then just working
>> through the list.
>> Tim and I had picked out two drafts that seemed bang on appropriate for
>> the directorate to review:
>> and
>> Tim and I both have some initial comments on the httpstate-cookie draft.
>> You can see them by clicking on the IESG evaluation tab in he
>> datatracker. If you think we've missed something please send email to
>> this list.
>> Nick Mathewson provided Tim and I with some comments on the ipfix-anon
>> draft which I will forward shortly to the mailing list.
>> Cheers,
>> spt
>> _______________________________________________
>> privacydir mailing list