icit in the use case, largely because of the
question of defining "better for what?"
Melinda
--
Melinda Shore
melinda.sh...@gmail.com
Software longa, hardware brevis
___
dns-privacy mailing list
dns-privacy@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
On 3/11/19 9:13 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> I admit I'm not sure that Secdispatch is so important here. The
> subject of the side meeting is not security-specific.
It also conflicts with irtfopen, which may impact the
availability of pearg people, hrpc folk, etc.
Melinda
--
Software longa,
On 9/24/18 11:58 AM, Amelia Andersdotter wrote:
> I have difficulties seeing how a user (within the meaning of individual
> internet consumer) has any practical choice to other than to share PII
> with a DNS provider? It's not so much about "willingness" as it is about
> "feeling comfortable with".
On 10/22/17 10:14 PM, Alexander Mayrhofer wrote:
> since we’re not scheduled for a session in Singapore – would anybody be
> interested in meeting up for a bar BoF during the meeting? eg. a lunch
> break?
I'd be interested. What topics do you have in mind?
Also, while I'm always up for the bar, t
On 7/26/16 10:01 AM, Shane Kerr wrote:
Does anybody know what the best practice is in the rest of the crypto
world?
Well, the correct answer to nearly any technical question is "it
depends." But figure roughly on padding to fixed block length,
depending, and that padding contents should be ran
Hi, Tariq - where I think you're parting company with the working
group is in the belief that there must be some way of deriving
identity information from the surveilled data. That's actually
not the case - for example, an observer should not be able to
determine what sort of material a user is r
On 4/13/15 8:02 PM, Zhiwei Yan wrote:
> RFC 3118 provides a scheme for this issue:
> http://www.rfc-base.org/txt/rfc-3118.txt
Authentication addresses the "who are you" question (sort
of) but not the "Can I trust you?" one. If you're sitting
in an airport terminal and someone offers you an IP add
On 11/24/14 1:05 PM, Tim Wicinski wrote:
> I did not say a requirements document. I said the Problem Statement, and
> evaluation metrics. Neither are requirements.
I've been concerned about the proliferation of problem statement
documents (and use case documents, but less about requirements
docum
