Hiya, On 09/13/2013 07:55 AM, Leif Johansson wrote: >> > >> > If we -- the IETF community -- had a definition of privacy, that would >> > help, but we don't. >> > > Its always entertaining to go trolling back to first principles on one of > these IETF lists but we've done that before and its typically about as > useful as random walks through technology.
Well, to be fair to Dave, I don't think he's trolling. We're seeing a bunch of proposals for things to do on this list and that's great - keep 'em coming; write I-Ds, we can figure out how to handle 'em etc. That's all good. But, where I think Dave is right is that we don't have an overview, so its possible that some effort we devote here could be wasted if we miss something important. So, while I definitely do not want to see us go into an analytic paralysis, I do think some higher level consideration would be good in addition to the specific proposals we need to get. > > I hope and suspect some folks are busy working on problem statement > drafts already... Great! If folks are doing that, I'd appreciate a heads-up offlist, just so's we have a chance to avoid some duplication. That's not required though - work away quietly if you prefer until you're ready. S. _______________________________________________ perpass mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perpass
