On 03/12/2014 10:22 AM, Avri Doria wrote: > There was a decision to use the ietf-privacy email list for the PM > review work work instead of the perpass list. > > This was sent to ietf-privacy list and then forwarded to perpass, but we > should probably try to limit discussion to the ietf-privacy list if at > all possible.
Except for this: I'd like to really thank Avri and also Scott for getting this together and for being willing to try help us organise these reviews. And everyone else who has or will contribute as well of course:-) Cheers, S. > > avri > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [ietf-privacy] Draft report on IETF89 PM review lunch meeting > report > Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 06:19:51 -0400 > From: Avri Doria <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > > > Draft Meeting report. > > A set of notes created by Scott Brim (thanks!) can be found at: > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GwD5m09p42fS3OWucYwPZ0lWcVN8Y_HIN0yp2BzYYYI/edit?usp=sharing > > > Those who were at the meeting should feel free to add their comments. A > text view of their current state is attached to this message. > > In terms of the meeting, we discussed several issues and I believe we > came up with the following: > > - Volunteers will be begin to work on reviews of existing standards > track RFCs > > - While the reviews will be primarily for Pervasive Monitoring (PM) > risks and issues, privacy issues will also be in scope for the reviews. > > - Several Protocols were given as first examples including; > -- DNS (there are already some reviews in circulation) > -- DHCP (There is already an review i this area) > -- URI usage > -- yet to be selected from the INT area > > There is a long list of things to be reviewed. Stephen Farrell agreed > to check with other ADs on any particular recommendations they might > have on docs to be reviewed. > > - There are several volunteers for this work listed in the meeting > notes. Several volunteers came forward later. This will be tracked on > the wiki once it is set up. > > - An initial milestone of 15 May was set for some of the reviews. > > - We had a discussion of some of the review work that had been done. It > was the feeling of the group that while we should be collecting a set of > bases for PM reviews, we would build on the work done for privacy > including RFC6973 Questionnaire. Creating a criteria set for PM > reviewing would be an ongoing project. There was discussion on the > utility of prioritizing or categorizing the PM and Privacy concerns. > > - While the group did not decide to work on reviews of current drafts, > there was a spirit of cooperation on the work being done by Gen Art. > This needs follow-up. > > - There was a decision to use the ietf-privacy email list for this work > instead of the perpass list. This is being sent to ietf-privacy and > then forwarded to perpass, but we should probably try to limit > discussion to the ietf-privacy list if at all possible. > > - I will work to coordinate activities Using an IETF WIki. this Wiki > has been setup, <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/ppm-legacy-review/> > but I have not done anything with it yet. Still learning this flavor of > wiki, but will have some first pages soon. Eg. will put thse notes and > the meeting notes on the wiki. > > > 26 People signed the not quite blue sheets. > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > perpass mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perpass > _______________________________________________ perpass mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perpass
