On Jun 17, 2013, at 8:52 AM, DANE <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 17, 2013, at 12:52 AM, Warren Kumari wrote: >> Hi there, >> >> I suspect that this might be a contentious call, but I feel that it is >> well within my rights as a chair. I have not spoken with my co-chair >> about this, so if there is a kerfuffle / centi-thread on discuss@, it is >> my fault :-P >> >> I would prefer that participants not use pseudonyms on the DANE list. As >> an IETF participant contributions fall under the Note Well -- having >> contributions coming from a name that is obviously a pseudonym "feels" >> wrong, and I'm concerned about the IPR implications. >> >> Now, obviously fairly much all of the identities participating *could* be >> pseudonyms (e.g has anyone seen John C. Klensin's drivers license / >> passport?), but most of the participants / identities hare are known >> (e.g. I know and have met the entry that uses the label Richard Barnes -- >> no clue if that is his legal name, but I have no reason to suspect it >> isn't). > > So basically you're saying that as long as a name appears to be a real > one then it's okay, whilst anything that obviously isn't a real name is > not ? How will that judgement be made ? If for example someone called > 'Poo Ann Wee' from Singapore registers how will you tell if it's fake or > not ? > > Closed Shops have been illegal in the UK since 1990 btw ;) > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_Shop
I can't speak for Warren. But IMHO we have to keep the Note-Well seriously. If folk contribute technology to the IETF it would be could if we (collectively) have a reasonable idea who those folk are. It would be very painful if in the future I'd be implementing technology that was brought to the IETF by [email protected] and I found I was being sued by a very real legal entity by infringing their patents. It is off course not the case that everybody has to know everybody but if we _collectively_ do not know who is behind [email protected] then I start to feel uncomfortable about using the technology, specifically if the contributions are highly innovative and competent and thus patentable. For debates like this, or any other process issue, I really do not care if you use Pseudonyms or not[*]. --Olaf Kolkman NLnet Labs PS. As many people on the DANE list will appreciate this is not a technical issue but a trust issue. I am not proposing mechanisms that involve authentications, I-Ds and what have you but I personally would appreciate people to be forthcoming. [*] I know that [email protected] has commented on some IETF discussions in the past.
_______________________________________________ dane mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane
