Re: [Trans] Draft agenda

[Jeremy Rowley <[e-mail]>]

I don't think there's weak interest in redaction. I think most people are 
stumped on how to move forward. Given the discussions on the Google CT policy 
list and CAB Form (and the current Symantec practice of redacting SAN 
information), it's a huge topic. The question is how do we progress towards 
consensus when there are such polar view points.

-----Original Message-----
From: Trans [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Melinda Shore
Sent: Thursday, March 9, 2017 1:45 PM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: Paul Wouters <[e-mail]>
Subject: [Trans] Draft agenda

Hi, all:

This is a first poke at an agenda, with some open questions (for example, has 
there been any progress on a log monitoring API?).  Please flag any problems, 
raise any questions, or suggest any additions.

Thanks,

Melinda

========

trans session, ietf 98
13:00-14:30 Tuesday March 28, 2017 @ Room Studio 4

Agenda
------

administrivia (~5 minutes)
blue sheets, minute taker, jabber scribe, agenda-bashing Note Well

status update
. charter unchanged
. issue tracker (17 open tickets)
. 6962-bis: WGLC completed - significant issue raised by
    Mozilla, nearing resolution
. Redaction: Weak interest but we need a way forward . threat-analysis: 
stuck - additional author?
. ct-gossip: through wglc
. ct-dnssec: no update
. ct-binaries: new drafts, apparently there's work being
    done on this problem outside the IETF

6962bis follow-up, obtaining proofs  (Eran/Richard)

Name redaction/privacy
. use of VRFs for name redaction (Eran)
. a privacy-preserving mechanism for obtaining and and
    reporting log misbehavior (Saba)

binaries logging
. draft-zhang-trans-ct-binary-codes-04 (Frank) . current work on this problem 
outside of the IETF (DKG)

new work
. Log Monitoring API

Any other business?