IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Raven] Comments on Draft -- Take 2

Ed Stone <estone@synernet.com> Mon, 07 February 2000 20:26 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA20950 for <raven-archive@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Feb 2000 15:26:15 -0500 (EST)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA02558; Mon, 7 Feb 2000 15:09:56 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA02535 for <raven@optimus.ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Feb 2000 15:09:55 -0500 (EST)
Received: from fast.synernet.com (IDENT:root@fast.synernet.net [166.82.6.2] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA20624 for <raven@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Feb 2000 15:11:21 -0500 (EST)
Received: from computername (a793c.vnet.net [166.82.194.182]) by fast.synernet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA24461 for <raven@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Feb 2000 15:10:43 -0500
Message-Id: <4.2.0.58.20000207150913.009add50@fast.synernet.com>
X-Sender: estone@fast.synernet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58
Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2000 15:10:59 -0500
To: raven@ietf.org
From: Ed Stone <estone@synernet.com>
Subject: Re: [Raven] Comments on Draft -- Take 2
In-Reply-To: <389F2135.EF3217C9@sprintparanet.com>
References: <D1A6C6C41B4CD311965D00C04F2C8D514526EF@webaccess.crblaw.com> <4.2.0.58.20000207140010.009a92d0@fast.synernet.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Sender: raven-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: raven-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: Raven Discussion List <raven.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: raven@ietf.org

At 02:47 PM 2/7/2000 , you wrote:
>I think it is more accurate to say that the IETF has determined that the
>lack of tapability in strong encryption is not a problem.  One does not
>need to fix something that is not broken.

It has been my understanding that the wiretap issue addressed by this 
process is separate and apart from any encryption issues. Specifically, it 
excludes matters related to encryption of the contents that may be 
intercepted by wiretaps, as I understand it.


>Ed Stone wrote:
> >
> > At 01:35 PM 2/7/2000 , chefren wrote:
> >
> > >Late? The proposed text has nothing to do with a solution
> > >for the real problem. We still have to start...
> >
> > IETF has decided NOT to start. See the draft.
> >
> > >The decision-maker, IETF, has made standards for a long
> > >time happily with little or even no interference with laws.
> > >Unfortunately(!) that has ended. The current stuborness of
> > >IETF may well be described as childish...
> >
> > The draft states IETF's position. Do you have contributions to the
> > definition of wiretapping or the rationale?
> >
> > --
> > --------------------------
> > Ed Stone
> > estone@synernet.com
> > --------------------------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > raven mailing list
> > raven@ietf.org
> > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/raven
>
>--
>--------.--------------------------------------.
>  ------/     Christian Price                   /
>   ----/     Technical Solutions Consultant    /
>   ---/     Four Corners Area ITOT/OSA        /
>   --/     SprintParanet, Phoenix Office     /
>   -/     602-266-9242                      /
>    '--------------------------------------'
>
>_______________________________________________
>raven mailing list
>raven@ietf.org
>http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/raven

--
--------------------------
Ed Stone
estone@synernet.com
--------------------------

_______________________________________________
raven mailing list
raven@ietf.org
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/raven

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email