Re: [Trans] Compatibility of name redaction and EV

Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com> Tue, 19 August 2014 20:42 UTC

Return-Path: <kent@bbn.com>
X-Original-To: trans@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: trans@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EA111A06E8 for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 13:42:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.869
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.869 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 LPWE43iCIaMR for <trans@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 13:42:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.bbn.com (smtp.bbn.com [128.33.0.80]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F9461A6EFA for <trans@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 13:42:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dommiel.bbn.com ([192.1.122.15]:43875 helo=comsec.home) by smtp.bbn.com with esmtp (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <kent@bbn.com>) id 1XJqEv-000MB1-Ah for trans@ietf.org; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 16:42:45 -0400
Message-ID: <53F3B6C4.2000108@bbn.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 16:42:44 -0400
From: Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: trans@ietf.org
References: <CABrd9SQ=mW7DoQUkXGv5M=nuoR1fTFG5N1Qc_PyK+mtm6E6s_A@mail.gmail.com> <53F25A33.5020405@bbn.com> <CABrd9SQcYQCV93CC-1DocNwOrKa0aJVqMaOMVRPWJt3pinvuiA@mail.gmail.com> <53F26610.8000608@bbn.com> <CABrd9SQWyNjvHdZXJ_eZCg4iFtdUxrWDQL1uVuAM+xnvdMCdFA@mail.gmail.com> <53F39933.8030706@bbn.com> <CABrd9SRXC+n4D=L9CcxuhXuQBj0Ff=KrW81r_J8ZWAurxUL1xA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABrd9SRXC+n4D=L9CcxuhXuQBj0Ff=KrW81r_J8ZWAurxUL1xA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/trans/EcUvOUou42PUkMyBAxoc0nKlWAY
Subject: Re: [Trans] Compatibility of name redaction and EV
X-BeenThere: trans@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Public Notary Transparency working group discussion list <trans.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/trans>, <mailto:trans-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/trans/>
List-Post: <mailto:trans@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:trans-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans>, <mailto:trans-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 20:42:49 -0000

Ben,

> ...
>> It's rather unusual for an author of an RFC to publicly state that he plans
>> to ignore the RFC if it doesn't match his implementation plans.
> As you are fond of pointing out, I am not the author, I am one of the
> editors. I am perhaps overly honest in stating up front that I will
> not unconditionally follow the consensus decisions of the WG, but
> surely this is far from being a unique stance.
I don't recall making that observation about your role in generating
this doc. Can you point to a message from me that made that statement,
i.e., that you are an editor, not a doc author? I just don't recall.

I agree that it is common to speak of doc editors, especially when the
content is derived from many sources, e.g., WG list discussions. In this 
case,
the source for the initial doc material was very narrow, and I believe
Eran said that you are the one responsible for making edits to address 
issues.
So, forgive my choice of words to describe your role.

As for a public statement wrt ignoring WG consensus (in an implementation)
by a doc "editor" it strikes me as very unusual, if not unique, based on
my 28 years of IETF participation.

Steve