Re: [Unwanted-trackers] Unwanted-trackers Digest, Vol 9, Issue 16

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Fri, 02 February 2024 13:32 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.com>
X-Original-To: unwanted-trackers@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: unwanted-trackers@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D830C151989 for <unwanted-trackers@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Feb 2024 05:32:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.903
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.903 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rtfm-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HbDZmcRdjcIa for <unwanted-trackers@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Feb 2024 05:32:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yb1-xb2e.google.com (mail-yb1-xb2e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b2e]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90D39C14F739 for <unwanted-trackers@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Feb 2024 05:32:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yb1-xb2e.google.com with SMTP id 3f1490d57ef6-dc23bf7e5aaso2102981276.0 for <unwanted-trackers@ietf.org>; Fri, 02 Feb 2024 05:32:13 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1706880732; x=1707485532; darn=ietf.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ACvMUJjPyPsq/rolFEmdQJqpv6GPg0OA/o8igjWeW28=; b=Rg3xgodHev78w1/EDKJCbXK6O6S068n1o/vue0PZLujzdwZ/LrNr/SZBpoujYZVU72 +5Ny0x4kHgYAh0/4hKWdJC1XMr/KS03Y49ahxe9hviBAyXKZ3di+DJVkFUWqC9AM2Cp0 SLBRBfkrW3iRHdm90j+1B5k8lDDoFVTS/AxgseCoMFJ0Wy/zY01agsYget6FLA4vHhG/ +Kh7u2brcGRmU6TGmnMhaGEXBauCf6zJeosm9gDjv0u+nV9WlNBZ1xr1ttA3bGuuzxXs OLG/nxhArqWOhjmyGMwdIjGzTI9CVrqXr+cL7ReITREOQtsF7Iw4WVIxpLZtmMS+pAkS T+tw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1706880732; x=1707485532; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=ACvMUJjPyPsq/rolFEmdQJqpv6GPg0OA/o8igjWeW28=; b=i5wh4ayFNREzMje4vCaDJYT2CsbUuv3mvvuii0lVbYjNSZAjac2ov+n1m0XTnZLesh HeJNIgnuCfMU6i4CLpjT/dlamD1R719QlBrY/nks53nSZWmyC6QKND4viLcVblCxoE3L n4qFRkckEX0TZ8bt5cW99ZI9SuVAKUpkmWcYqb/3DvpKgvZngqKQ80O5BE+nGMs680ex N9aOBWJoNu6PQ09hu8iIhaLeYduT5VoT40MvkJpQWwDBdMi9qw8KYpmEr/YXv9p5ua8L kds5+xgDeZnlNL/eeaR+CG0H8bbx7pFDjYwqlE7stGHdLjmG2fUvxtjxElx3843lCQ2R M6wQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yzul1ngF+LjzJv+V8XzhDmdLqfZL9nIl7LP0iFc5T9/Mn/RJOUu uKjGZfX8ypKP5Tq4pPsPSMJMeX0qbqirxF/CS1z4XJgjMbKfZI5jTqRNNzdY7QVVJfXjX1sfLAy H6w4q5U1kWGnAeocQXpBugupiWiDwcai9GKk8pPyCe3RL6YVK
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEmwpktinzhFPEfUVhhXZYlZAmZMjd/wi7rlvECQ4Jn0Xv3JisbXTzqqSCDekaoFxDd+8Zh4ireYXakdld77Vo=
X-Received: by 2002:a25:b212:0:b0:dc2:41eb:d8b6 with SMTP id i18-20020a25b212000000b00dc241ebd8b6mr7852829ybj.23.1706880732408; Fri, 02 Feb 2024 05:32:12 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <mailman.106.1706299203.23110.unwanted-trackers@ietf.org> <CAHjg6nCAte9RvZhX8D2c4jxnuTmngn3ui79ZSUN3tZq61O+0+w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHjg6nCAte9RvZhX8D2c4jxnuTmngn3ui79ZSUN3tZq61O+0+w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2024 05:31:36 -0800
Message-ID: <CABcZeBPqipOAbQgDfXX85TXjEPvSHfPmcvREN+qVYmj0Sto0xA@mail.gmail.com>
To: warren merrill <warrenmerrill46@gmail.com>
Cc: unwanted-trackers@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000babefc0610662321"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/unwanted-trackers/vQOInmY733rWy8GdzsSsDE1iSfQ>
Subject: Re: [Unwanted-trackers] Unwanted-trackers Digest, Vol 9, Issue 16
X-BeenThere: unwanted-trackers@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions on detecting unwanted location trackers <unwanted-trackers.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/unwanted-trackers>, <mailto:unwanted-trackers-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/unwanted-trackers/>
List-Post: <mailto:unwanted-trackers@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:unwanted-trackers-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/unwanted-trackers>, <mailto:unwanted-trackers-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2024 13:32:17 -0000

Hi Warren

,I can't speak to whether businesses are losing interest, but there was
never any plausible chance of having an IETF standard by the end of 2023.
That's simply not the timeline that SDOs operate on for any complex
technical specification (in my experience, it would be a challenging
timeline even for a company which didn't have to do any standards work).

-Ekr


On Sat, Jan 27, 2024 at 1:22 PM warren merrill <warrenmerrill46@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I fully support the  DULT charter initiative, but I worry that some with
> business interests are losing interest due to the excessively long time the
> development is taking.
> At this point, it is months beyond what was expected by interested
> industry members, and I am aware of at least one manufacturer who is
> readying refunds for pre-orders taken mid-2023, unable to ship products
> according to the schedule both Apple and Google agreed on because of
> Apple's reluctance to do anything before the standard is set in stone, and
> Google honoring their pledge to wait on Apple. "The end of 2023" has
> passed, and now it increasingly looks like "by the end of 2024".
>
> On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 3:02 PM <unwanted-trackers-request@ietf.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Send Unwanted-trackers mailing list submissions to
>>         unwanted-trackers@ietf.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>         https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/unwanted-trackers
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>         unwanted-trackers-request@ietf.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>         unwanted-trackers-owner@ietf.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Unwanted-trackers digest..."
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>    1. Re: Call for consensus on proposed DULT charter (Shambavi (Sham))
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: "Shambavi (Sham)" <shambavik@google.com>
>> To: rdd@cert.org
>> Cc: unwanted-trackers@ietf.org
>> Bcc:
>> Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 11:33:37 -0800
>> Subject: Re: [Unwanted-trackers] Call for consensus on proposed DULT
>> charter
>> Hi Roman,
>>
>> Thank you, I am in support of the DULT charter.
>>
>> Best,
>> Sham
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 12:03 PM <unwanted-trackers-request@ietf.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>
>>> To: "unwanted-trackers@ietf.org" <unwanted-trackers@ietf.org>
>>> Cc:
>>> Bcc:
>>> Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2024 02:41:51 +0000
>>> Subject: [Unwanted-trackers] Call for consensus on proposed DULT charter
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> With the benefit of discussions at two BOFs at IETF 117 and 118, there
>>> appears to be a strong consensus signal to form a WG around the topic of
>>> Detecting Unwanted Location Trackers (DULT) [1].  There also appeared to a
>>> critical mass of energy to do the work (write and review drafts).
>>>
>>> IETF 118 BOF identified critical charter changes that were needed to
>>> refine the DULT scope [2].  In the weeks following the BoF, PRs have been
>>> filed and merged against these open issues.  Conversation appears to have
>>> subsided on the list.  I’d like to assess where we stand with a formal
>>> consensus check on this revised charter. Please review
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-dult/00-02/ (00-02) and
>>> respond to the list by Thursday, Feb 1, 2024.
>>>
>>> ==[ consensus check question ]==
>>>
>>> Do you support the charter text? Or do you have objections or blocking
>>> concerns (please describe what they might be and how you would propose
>>> addressing the concern)?
>>>
>>> ==[ consensus check question ]==
>>>
>>> If you previously spoke up at the 117/118 BoFs, please repeat yourself
>>> here.  The outcome of this consensus check will inform the next steps with
>>> DULT.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Roman
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/118/materials/minutes-118-dult-202311061200-00
>>> [2]
>>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/unwanted-trackers/mAIFv6ns5GGS79Uch3cj80uVa2U/
>>>
>> Unwanted-trackers mailing list
>> Unwanted-trackers@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/unwanted-trackers
>>
> --
> Unwanted-trackers mailing list
> Unwanted-trackers@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/unwanted-trackers
>