On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 4:45 PM, Tarah Wheeler <[email protected]> wrote: > > I’ve watched this situation be cautiously talked around for months now, and > I’d be interested to hear people’s thoughts on asking some unassailably > corporate-neutral experts on both sides of this debate to provide guidance. > Whose opinion are you interested in hearing on whether or not permitting > certificate privacy and accepting it as a browser standard is a good idea? > I’m putting myself and Symantec out there in a vulnerable way; I and we > might not always hear what we want to hear, but every one of us wants to > make the internet better in the way we believe will work best.
Tarah, There have been multiple requests for use cases to be brought to the group. I have brought some use cases from a group discussion outside the IETF and others have contributed well. We also know that the IETF has addressed DNS privacy in several WGs, including the DNSEXT WG, which developed DNSSEC Hashed Authenticated Denial of Existence (aka NSEC3), and the DPRIVE WG which published DNS Privacy Considerations (RFC 7626). What guidance are you hoping the WG will get by asking for "corporate-neutral experts"? How does that align with the rough consensus model used in WGs? Thanks, Peter _______________________________________________ Trans mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans
