Hi Cyrus, On 30/01/15 16:39, Cyrus Daboo wrote: >> > > Whilst that is true I don't think we should be required to deal with > issues that are generic to HTTP itself (and in some cases already > covered in the base HTTP specs - e.g. server log information).
I think that's fair, but could you also watch out to see if there is (or is not) a 3rd category of issue which isn't generic to HTTP or covered in HTTP specs but is also not specific to tzdist? What I mean is that there could be things identified here that would affect some but not all protocols layered on HTTP. For example, it could be that using HTTP at startup or periodically to make the same requests causes some issue(s) that fall into this category. Another way to think about this category would be things that you don't want to put in the tzdist spec but that you also don't think the httpbis WG would have agreed to put into the base HTTP spec. Regardless of whether or not those end up documented in tzdist, noting them and that they're of this nature could be useful. > Once I > get a chance to look over Daniel's comments in depth (and a big thank > you to him for taking the time to do a through analysis), I will try and > propose some text for a Privacy Considerations section - the first > statement in that will be a reference to the various sections in the > 7230-7234 document suite that are relevant. There will be issues > specific to tzdist that we definitely need to address. It is a really excellent review, yes. Cheers, S. _______________________________________________ ietf-privacy mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-privacy
