I've been uncharacteristically (for me) quiet up 'til now, so let me -- perhaps naively -- say what, to me, seems like a simple thing.
1.) It's axiomatic that Received headers disclosure some level of private data 2.) It's a matter of debate how valuable that data is to those who would abuse it 3.) It's a matter of debate as to what impact redaction/removal of that data from message headers would cause Why isn't this as simple as chartering the WG to go off and: 1.) Document the answers to questions 2 and 3 above, with data 2.) If they so choose after doing #1, propose remedies or changes to the existing methodologies consistent with the data they found above At that point, everyone can observe the data, attempt to replicate it (almost like a peer-review process, one would think) and then the discussion can be about whether or not any proposal that came out of the WG meets the larger goals of the net at-large. It seems that it shouldn't be this hard to charter them to go off and "crunch data" and "come up with a proposed solution consistent with that data". Nobody's "committed" to anything by letting folks go off and work on this. so why is there such vociferous debate over letting them go do that? What am I missing? (it's possible I have missed something, because this debate is the most traffic we've seen in years on this list). D -- I prefer to use encrypted mail. My public key fingerprint is FD6A 6990 F035 DE9E 3713 B4F1 661B 3AD6 D82A BBD0. You can download it at http://www.megacity.org/gpg_dballing.txt Learn how to encrypt your email with the E-Mail Self Defense Guide: https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en/
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Shutup mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/shutup
