Re: [Trans] Call for adoption: draft-strad-trans-redaction-00

Melinda Shore <> Fri, 16 September 2016 20:10 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8472712B314 for <>; Fri, 16 Sep 2016 13:10:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id d_FjPoMDEIn3 for <>; Fri, 16 Sep 2016 13:10:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA1F612B313 for <>; Fri, 16 Sep 2016 13:10:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id cm16so28960163pac.0 for <>; Fri, 16 Sep 2016 13:10:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=to8eiDgWwj4cmtwJcYrP8RFFqfIaA+Qml8U/4RFldZw=; b=SigPYEKo4OVLyjffI0SuUT4WsD5pnFaNXpoulS1wZPyPO61CGwjd/IuhKReHQgegqw bMbUzWdh1tOjjDAGMx9toYeVAi2KWIbgH8bhFkHoKZcgRIA7WrsmubFsW/EUOyrR+lQE hXQLYCSgap0dTFeBNApZqkeZzTr7W4/H5gufzdRVk7SUjszDRWn3zblrzOPyGIsL4aEA KJyAozeWpxcxoOBIduB8cq0nGSCyv43hgr4ju6qukV4IqldqRMqfwuZ7SCKKaTCPJQAr Ij/AXf6ev+WjSvwxqpc78taG9pTBb9gy99B/rLG6MTOfH1+JOtKaqd6BrD1yqhxKp91g CZ8A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=to8eiDgWwj4cmtwJcYrP8RFFqfIaA+Qml8U/4RFldZw=; b=YixF1xTZXCf23JhsHBA8WuPbfYOqNWaE6d415nfvzF2j6L/Fk2/FItICwBk6qromJm qmC7sQJktcXVQaueDyjY55gS+Wdq75V4dX+pba4RbnbRBeGvGI16WzfmaiZjs6fMn17D BniDuIIk5juh1CltfDJUkzshigEmvU/6FAmKNuaz2EOtNteseE746rxfAbrIkbUQRspq 5aB3f7XbxrU0s3NzCGaSkf3LbMcUE+hVeT6sgy5EiS/PDYXfzFRa9hSW+tNIcoLYBApv O0dy2V92cQlrAvWDqd4e5XfihULo/bkluZFCByMU5PzzcTrqRxnsEvRDXs8rVe8qEsbz s71Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwNOtT8iSUy7Gmns2xbJ+MlGw6QPutnORX8rjX1MTQ4VdJya7Cogzc2DIN9opglP4Q==
X-Received: by with SMTP id oy4mr25841254pac.46.1474056656470; Fri, 16 Sep 2016 13:10:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Melindas-MacBook-Pro.local ( []) by with ESMTPSA id n77sm19857625pfj.31.2016. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 16 Sep 2016 13:10:55 -0700 (PDT)
To: Ben Laurie <>, Rob Stradling <>
References: <> <> <>
From: Melinda Shore <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 12:10:52 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="h9dcfTve0SKtQb5idRWChh143Awrjxw0G"
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [Trans] Call for adoption: draft-strad-trans-redaction-00
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Public Notary Transparency working group discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 20:10:58 -0000

On 9/16/16 3:18 AM, Ben Laurie wrote:
> This is a fair point, and my position is that _if_ there is anyone who
> will actually use redaction (i.e. clients that will support it, we
> already know some CAs would like to be less transparent), then it
> should be a WG doc, but I am equally OK with it being entirely
> dropped, since it is not really an improvement to the ecosystem, in my
> view.

I haven't discussed this with Paul but my feeling right now
is that I'm happy to make adoption contingent on 1) someone
stating that they will definitely be using it, and 2) one of
those persons who will definitely be using it being willing
to step up as co-author.  There's no point to standardizing
technology that's not actually useful, and failing to adopt
the draft now does not close off the possibility of publishing
a redaction document in the future.

We've got another week - let's see if someone steps up, and
in the meantime Paul and I will talk.