Robin, On 12/9/13 2:00 PM, Robin Wilton wrote: > Eliot, > > I think your second edit is probably too broad, in the sense that it could > create quite a lot of room for abuse. You currently have: > >>> More limited-scope monitoring or other services or to assist with >>> network operations that >>> is required in order to operate the network or an application is not >>> considered pervasive monitoring > I would suggest something along the following lines. The first part is just a > rewording of your text; the part in square brackets is prompted by what I > think we can learn from existing approaches to pervasive monitoring. > > Where monitoring is of limited scope, or services in support of network > operations are required in order to operate the network, these are not > necessarily to be considered de facto pervasive monitoring [; however, > thought should be given to whether they enable pervasive monitoring, either > directly or as a by-product of their primary purpose]. >
Your alternative would be fine with me. Eliot _______________________________________________ perpass mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perpass
