IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [VIPR] VIPR privacy issue

Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca> Fri, 27 January 2012 01:38 UTC

Return-Path: <fluffy@fluffy.im>
X-Original-To: vipr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: vipr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA3E221F85B6 for <vipr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Jan 2012 17:38:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.476
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.476 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.123, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Pf8f3L4JmZbV for <vipr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Jan 2012 17:38:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pw0-f44.google.com (mail-pw0-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E65921F8597 for <vipr@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Jan 2012 17:38:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: by pbdu7 with SMTP id u7so845626pbd.31 for <vipr@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Jan 2012 17:38:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.68.135.1 with SMTP id po1mr10378310pbb.16.1327628280304; Thu, 26 Jan 2012 17:38:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.4.100] (128-107-239-233.cisco.com. [128.107.239.233]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id n8sm15782792pbq.7.2012.01.26.17.37.59 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 26 Jan 2012 17:37:59 -0800 (PST)
Sender: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@fluffy.im>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>
In-Reply-To: <4F21FAEA.8070306@acm.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 18:37:58 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <E08C51DE-63C8-47FE-AFA7-0E267DA327A3@iii.ca>
References: <4F1F1A42.1030201@acm.org> <9734F726-C0A8-42D6-87A4-65535D5F3E80@bbn.com> <4F217CC9.4080802@acm.org> <50D0BC87-EC6C-401E-A2F9-A05AC60D5EF0@bbn.com> <92E46A75-E370-4A52-BF04-F2D811D3C0C0@softarmor.com> <4F21C7EC.2000201@acm.org> <0A6AADFB-57D3-4057-A4E5-98CB6FC2F2D1@iii.ca> <4F21FAEA.8070306@acm.org>
To: Marc Petit-Huguenin <petithug@acm.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: vipr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [VIPR] VIPR privacy issue
X-BeenThere: vipr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Verification Involving PSTN Reachability working group <vipr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/vipr>, <mailto:vipr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/vipr>
List-Post: <mailto:vipr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:vipr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vipr>, <mailto:vipr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 01:38:01 -0000

On Jan 26, 2012, at 6:16 PM, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
> 
> On 01/26/2012 04:28 PM, Cullen Jennings wrote:
>> 
>> On Jan 26, 2012, at 2:38 PM, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote:
>> 
>>> 2) delay for RELOAD,
>> 
>> forgive my rolling around on the floor laughing... no matter how slow
>> RELOAD is, I'll bet Eric Burger some fist full of untraceable cash it will
>> be done well before VIPR
>> 
>> 
> 
> Well, it's up to the WG to decide what they want to do with this problem.

agree

> I
> really would have liked to have these drafts in good shape before passing the
> torch to someone else in two months, but it seems that it will not happen.
> 

I'd love to see VIPR all in good shape by Paris. If I had to guess, I would give RELOAD a 35% chance of being IESG approved by Paris.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email