From nobody Thu Feb 1 04:31:17 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFBC2120713 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 04:31:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.909 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iwwHZOOUs74t for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 04:31:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D601A12D94B for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 04:31:12 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.46,444,1511823600"; d="scan'208";a="253261377" Received: from zmbs3.inria.fr ([128.93.142.16]) by mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 01 Feb 2018 13:31:11 +0100 Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2018 13:31:10 +0100 (CET) From: Harry Halpin To: Mallory Knodel Cc: hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <1941560248.356205.1517488270959.JavaMail.zimbra@inria.fr> In-Reply-To: <698cff13-c375-a850-3cbd-124ef3454741@article19.org> References: <698cff13-c375-a850-3cbd-124ef3454741@article19.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Originating-IP: [85.27.57.205] X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.0.9_GA_6191 (ZimbraWebClient - FF57 (Linux)/8.0.9_GA_6191) Thread-Topic: On the Politics of Standards Thread-Index: KYxkNyQ3dsuIO1eHxVBJ7u9pmBu9zg== Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] On the Politics of Standards X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2018 12:31:16 -0000 ----- Mail original ----- > De: "Mallory Knodel" > =C0: hrpc@irtf.org > Envoy=E9: Jeudi 1 F=E9vrier 2018 07:45:59 > Objet: Re: [hrpc] On the Politics of Standards >=20 > On 23/01/18 15:19, Amelia Andersdotter wrote: > >=20 > > On 2018-01-16 18:16, avri doria wrote: > >> Re: draft-tenoever-hrpc-political-02 > >> > >> > >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-tenoever-hrpc-political/ > >> > >> Questions: > >> > >> - Is the doc is ready to be a RG doc? > >=20 > > No. > >=20 >=20 Not yet, but it is going in an important direction. > I take the lead from the authors :) >=20 > >> - Does the doc contain issues that are still too controversial for the > >> group consensus for inclusion at the moment? Please be specific. > >=20 > > With the current research question, the conclusion seems foregone and > > also is, by itself, controversial. > >=20 >=20 > Issues are controversial but I don't think "too controversial" in the > sense that the point of the document seems to be to build consensus > around a pretty important foundational principle of the group. So I > think it's exactly the kind of thing the RG should be working on. When > the doc is ready for RG adoption. Yes, and I think the document is already making an important point, insofar= as that=20 it justifies the reasons for privacy and ethics reviews of documents due to= their=20 wider social implications.=20 >=20 > >> - Who is interested in working on it? > >=20 > > Me. > >=20 >=20 > Me, too. >=20 I would be happy to help. I feel the document leaves out relationships with= other standards that are more explicitly political and jurisdictional, as the IETF is part of an eco-system that inc= ludes national-level standards (ETRI), global standards (ITU), Web standards (W3C/WHATWG) - and in some areas (NI= ST, etc.) standards are explicitly national that IETF depends on!=20 .=20 However, the IETF is special insofar as its process is exceptionally open w= ith a goal of being universal and non-nationalized. Thus, there is even a larger responsibility there to = understand and track the possible political implications of protocols that transverse many political infrastructures. > >> - Are the authors willing to give up change control? > >> > >> - What remains to be be done on this? > >=20 > > Quite much, yes. > >=20 >=20 > Seems to me that framing is really important. There is not much of an > introduction, which would set the tone for the various chapters that > follow. I think that the case being made is that code/protocols/tech is > a regulator, much like law. And that while law is a tool and meant to be > impartial it obviously has political implications. So, too, protocols. > And then the various aspects of that framework follow in each section. I agree strongly and would note that part of the problem is not pretending = that particular standards aren't political, but that political ramifications should be noticed and made explicit. Making things = explicit is the core of standardization. >=20 > -Mallory >=20 > -- > Mallory Knodel > Head of Digital :: article19.org > gpg fingerprint :: E3EB 63E0 65A3 B240 BCD9 B071 0C32 A271 BD3C C780 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > hrpc mailing list > hrpc@irtf.org > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc >=20 From nobody Thu Feb 1 07:54:51 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A676312EB2D for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 07:54:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yitter.info header.b=Az2MtZnr; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yitter.info header.b=eCW4GgEH Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wZTHE4P_TGOb for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 07:54:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.yitter.info (mx4.yitter.info [159.203.56.111]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E495812D847 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 07:54:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11DDFBE072 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 15:54:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1517500487; bh=FcoXj7NmL2f69nW4Q7kt4d19vMt1FWeBSxqpjw4z18Y=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Az2MtZnrqAnvEztuc+16rNjQcRZwUlnsGlalGl/KkhHcTt/WnxqI11yLaK6+pIZcO EDB7a14ZidCEqZ4sh2mVFL2VNw411akRUIAesQ0OiD6b1+0f9o3/7izK2X+F8N+onK ZuRWhnWVWUqnpV9Zi3gHhD9WOqqO+Pt21qeBciZI= X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at crankycanuck.ca Received: from mx4.yitter.info ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx4.yitter.info [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KUFdU8xNyHgN for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 15:54:41 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2018 10:54:40 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1517500481; bh=FcoXj7NmL2f69nW4Q7kt4d19vMt1FWeBSxqpjw4z18Y=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=eCW4GgEHSltMJqQdobcNnOD+vd7i1rls9qc1Tg68FUVFN6wG2S/o7hScOvdGJNd6n JK49fH3134tRNK5QvMb78qL+e7+zgyKxpBvh1cmERdiNpIXU7CqHNJifUNFGJOm0b0 Be1M5ua1QINzwU+P2SF6Vm3c8rCiDH1d2X0gaCFU= From: Andrew Sullivan To: hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <20180201155437.GA26453@mx4.yitter.info> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] On the Politics of Standards X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2018 15:54:49 -0000 Hi, I don't have an answer to the "RG should adopt" questions (this all smacks too much of IETF process for a RG, in my opinion), but I will note one thing in this case: On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 12:16:05PM -0500, avri doria wrote: > Re: draft-tenoever-hrpc-political-02 >   > > - Who is interested in working on it? I will likely continue to review, but I have determined I must disclaim authorship and should not be listed as one of the authors on the front page any more. This is not a comment on the document, please note. A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com From nobody Thu Feb 1 08:29:23 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0401712EB42 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 08:29:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AXkvfRy8OokJ for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 08:29:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D3B1C12EB71 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 08:29:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ehHjh-0002sx-13 for hrpc@irtf.org; Thu, 01 Feb 2018 17:29:17 +0100 To: hrpc@irtf.org References: <20180118094058.xf6amdl3saumvrjr@sources.org> <20180123093625.GF913@mir> <20180124105314.GD4995@mir> <20180124172059.GA13067@mx4.yitter.info> <20180130142731.r4avtmbq33vcs7mf@nic.fr> From: Niels ten Oever Message-ID: <24aa5fdd-1070-b51e-fb32-9aad78f57d6c@nielstenoever.net> Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2018 17:29:15 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180130142731.r4avtmbq33vcs7mf@nic.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authenticated-As-Hash: f1842a279235a42f6aa2a2a81130733515c5a4ec X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Scan-Signature: 964c6a2bc69af72888bec91466701c23 Archived-At: Subject: [hrpc] Review Team // was: About draft-harkins-tls-dragonfly X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2018 16:29:22 -0000 Hi Stephane, Sorry for my late reply - am working hard with Gisela on reworking the great comments here on draft-association into a new version, and doing some more research. Reply in-line: On 01/30/2018 03:27 PM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > Anyone would be interested to volunteer for such an informal team? At > the beginning, it will be just a mailing list (or may be an issue > tracker on a Gitlab). > I am more than happy to be part of the review team and review a couple of drafts per month! Am sure we can find more people here willing to review? All the best, Niels From nobody Thu Feb 1 10:04:40 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96E8112EBB9 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 10:04:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2qj57bOkJA5o for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 10:04:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 23CC912D851 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 10:04:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ehJDt-0001bs-Dl for hrpc@irtf.org; Thu, 01 Feb 2018 19:04:33 +0100 To: hrpc@irtf.org References: <20180118094058.xf6amdl3saumvrjr@sources.org> <20180123093625.GF913@mir> <20180124105314.GD4995@mir> <20180124172059.GA13067@mx4.yitter.info> <20180130142731.r4avtmbq33vcs7mf@nic.fr> From: Mallory Knodel Message-ID: Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2018 21:04:24 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180130142731.r4avtmbq33vcs7mf@nic.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Scan-Signature: 938925967a2432a0d8c7279c30be63be Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] About draft-harkins-tls-dragonfly X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2018 18:04:39 -0000 On 30/01/18 17:27, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 09:35:08AM -0900, > Melinda Shore wrote > a message of 86 lines which said: > >> That said, there was review of the document prior to its having >> entered the publication queue (although it doesn't turn up in the >> datatracker), and that review (or those reviews) did not find a >> problem. The review process is probably a good place to start. > > I remember that it was discussed in Singapore: what about setting up > "something" for reviewing drafts about human rights, in the same way > there are reviews about security, routing, YANG, whatever? The IETF > being what it is, we don't need anyone's authorization, we can set it > up ourselves. If it works, we may in the future request some technical > support (being notified of drafts in Last Call, when there is one) and > something more "official", but it's not necessary at the start. > > Anyone would be interested to volunteer for such an informal team? At > the beginning, it will be just a mailing list (or may be an issue > tracker on a Gitlab). I'm interested! -Mallory -- Mallory Knodel Head of Digital :: article19.org gpg fingerprint :: E3EB 63E0 65A3 B240 BCD9 B071 0C32 A271 BD3C C780 From nobody Thu Feb 1 10:20:58 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 911E312DA4E for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 10:20:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.748 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.748 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LG_NOTEdE_oc for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 10:20:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lf0-x231.google.com (mail-lf0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A13E12D964 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 10:20:55 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lf0-x231.google.com with SMTP id w27so27645139lfd.6 for ; Thu, 01 Feb 2018 10:20:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=YQNG82xATll0f2PZaWByxaHauCTpVYj0UoEAg+MuTaw=; b=oBSyLEx0ci9fG7gXMQt0w2iFGz21jY3IxrSTw/fmdEin5xODTn1kF8QIxwWL4KxymL JyV8W/e4+7S0gCmAhb9nSiwA0e9vsLeOVOOzW0U65NsrVDW19rgDk0dpVFyZSikXK34W lCPuIH9piPs0DDkquhOq1sOYFsbWonYz0JA0ur5iVNEAvjLaKxKo0gmUZ57KfieSEFCu 6WyFFeoWuSwBBmT+MSGlTbSkYg5xFi8m9lkLeLxuF+t4Zc35xiqXpyvwrJkTv2fn5nhu 5ip0J8Rp71eFn+A7m67EbRc0JvTehkq6YaB5Ka+94OwcKVJbjNpFeTOR5FO9zwPqNdZY 4XBw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=YQNG82xATll0f2PZaWByxaHauCTpVYj0UoEAg+MuTaw=; b=pk3blPEq9/T8UCc5WYvQqEDVB6AWj71G5X4nqa96eEJ2spTtfMHTzUpA0xF8XsbEME P4+vMERTb314VEZPblOOJGuUIiY8vg7lY43+9HW6lYtmpxeIyzOJqtgRPnw8Fvt7IXM/ Oc5LHyBsFm8YLKWCQrF7QN35cjbNr1yk0LWtQnO2crkD9OegW8KAxxmm4BcNnaMcLKJu N11L/qMhYnaVeyhH/YxVlEYu0WvL8/cbmIjKRXUpvhESEDihb/Wvi3Mnu/rpf7qLqvIx cZem1wGsH2vD8o2ROC9ROMGZ5ymliikPWedgbu0bga8RhX2uwFuSpFaBNamYDXccxqJq k2tA== X-Gm-Message-State: AKwxytdpyYiYD2zwZV+E6UsdAyd8DD2oMohH6a8mojH4AeRsGgzg0z0d xGY0U/LmTpYQcPzhNC5Cp+lBMDrppLx3jSsvo1w= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x224xQirS2+1EhhF9GzuerMcClhxGmp4vN64zHW7xcCiM4RCKWjDQ3v1rAfKK6kSfd2NXkZbiZSk2dhu7T5yn7eo= X-Received: by 10.25.217.210 with SMTP id s79mr22447472lfi.73.1517509253405; Thu, 01 Feb 2018 10:20:53 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.46.36.4 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Feb 2018 10:20:12 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <24aa5fdd-1070-b51e-fb32-9aad78f57d6c@nielstenoever.net> References: <20180118094058.xf6amdl3saumvrjr@sources.org> <20180123093625.GF913@mir> <20180124105314.GD4995@mir> <20180124172059.GA13067@mx4.yitter.info> <20180130142731.r4avtmbq33vcs7mf@nic.fr> <24aa5fdd-1070-b51e-fb32-9aad78f57d6c@nielstenoever.net> From: Shivan Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2018 13:20:12 -0500 Message-ID: To: Niels ten Oever Cc: Hrpc Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c063c34fe23b705642aa7c3" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Review Team // was: About draft-harkins-tls-dragonfly X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2018 18:20:57 -0000 --94eb2c063c34fe23b705642aa7c3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Would also be very willing :) On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 11:29 AM, Niels ten Oever wrote: > Hi Stephane, > > Sorry for my late reply - am working hard with Gisela on reworking the > great comments here on draft-association into a new version, and doing > some more research. > > Reply in-line: > > On 01/30/2018 03:27 PM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > > Anyone would be interested to volunteer for such an informal team? At > > the beginning, it will be just a mailing list (or may be an issue > > tracker on a Gitlab). > > > > I am more than happy to be part of the review team and review a couple > of drafts per month! Am sure we can find more people here willing to > review? > > All the best, > > Niels > > _______________________________________________ > hrpc mailing list > hrpc@irtf.org > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc > --94eb2c063c34fe23b705642aa7c3 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Would also be very willing :)=C2=A0

On Thu, Feb 1,= 2018 at 11:29 AM, Niels ten Oever <mail@nielstenoever.net> wrote:
Hi Stephane,

Sorry for my late reply - am working hard with Gisela on reworking the
great comments here on draft-association into a new version, and doing
some more research.

Reply in-line:

On 01/30/2018 03:27 PM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> Anyone would be interested to volunteer for such an informal team? At<= br> > the beginning, it will be just a mailing list (or may be an issue
> tracker on a Gitlab).
>

I am more than happy to be part of the review team and review a couple
of drafts per month! Am sure we can find more people here willing to review= ?

All the best,

Niels

_______________________________________________
hrpc mailing list
hrpc@irtf.org
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc

--94eb2c063c34fe23b705642aa7c3-- From nobody Mon Feb 5 00:28:14 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2FE312946D for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 00:28:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.5 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EnVhwYzKbQdr for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 00:28:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.bortzmeyer.org (aetius.bortzmeyer.org [IPv6:2001:4b98:dc0:41:216:3eff:fece:1902]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17F831241F5 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 00:28:10 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id E822831D2A; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 09:28:06 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail.sources.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 76CFD1908BF; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 09:26:22 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2018 09:26:22 +0100 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Niels ten Oever Cc: Corinne Cath , Stephane Bortzmeyer , hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <20180205082622.tfvi6kvkzeiahnzw@sources.org> References: <20180110072053.GA15439@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <20180123100220.GD28814@mir> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180123100220.GD28814@mir> X-Transport: UUCP rules X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 9.3 X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] BGP and politics X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2018 08:28:13 -0000 On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 11:02:20AM +0100, Niels ten Oever wrote a message of 92 lines which said: > Thanks for this, I think this paper makes a similar point: > > https://policyreview.info/articles/analysis/myth-decentralised-internet I find this paper hard to read. It claims several times that BGP is not decentralised but distributed but it apparently never defines these terms. (And there is no agreed-upon definition, they are very fuzzy terms, mostly used to make a political point, not for a rigorous analysis.) It is an interesting question to see which one of BGP and DNS is the closest from a "perfect" peer-to-peer ideal. IMHO, BGP is "more P2P" (there is no root, no tree structure) but the entry barrier is higher (there are much less AS than domains). From nobody Mon Feb 5 08:50:42 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 603BC1271DF for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 08:50:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0pn8ZzB7KgWa for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 08:50:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87D11127077 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 08:50:37 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.46,465,1511823600"; d="scan'208";a="312136947" Received: from zmbs3.inria.fr ([128.93.142.16]) by mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 05 Feb 2018 17:50:35 +0100 Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2018 17:50:35 +0100 (CET) From: Harry Halpin To: Stephane Bortzmeyer Cc: Niels ten Oever , Corinne Cath , hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <2075755972.1812683.1517849435845.JavaMail.zimbra@inria.fr> In-Reply-To: <20180205082622.tfvi6kvkzeiahnzw@sources.org> References: <20180110072053.GA15439@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <20180123100220.GD28814@mir> <20180205082622.tfvi6kvkzeiahnzw@sources.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Originating-IP: [128.93.85.158] X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.0.9_GA_6191 (ZimbraWebClient - FF57 (Linux)/8.0.9_GA_6191) Thread-Topic: BGP and politics Thread-Index: xh4J20cIInNG/YaJTj0o+yELkfeSyg== Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] BGP and politics X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2018 16:50:41 -0000 ----- Mail original ----- > De: "Stephane Bortzmeyer" > =C0: "Niels ten Oever" > Cc: "Corinne Cath" , "Stephane Bortzmeyer" , hrpc@irtf.org > Envoy=E9: Lundi 5 F=E9vrier 2018 09:26:22 > Objet: Re: [hrpc] BGP and politics >=20 > On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 11:02:20AM +0100, > Niels ten Oever wrote > a message of 92 lines which said: >=20 > > Thanks for this, I think this paper makes a similar point: > >=20 > > https://policyreview.info/articles/analysis/myth-decentralised-internet >=20 > I find this paper hard to read. It claims several times that BGP is > not decentralised but distributed but it apparently never defines > these terms. (And there is no agreed-upon definition, they are very > fuzzy terms, mostly used to make a political point, not for a rigorous > analysis.) In terms of defining decentralized vs. distributed, we put forward this def= inition in our (hopefully!) rigorous analysis over the last 15 years of res= earch.=20 Decentralized system: A distributed system in which multiple authorities c= ontrol different components and no single authority is fully trusted by all= others. Thus, decentralized systems are subsets of distributed systems. The classic= definition of distributed systems is from Lamport: Distributed system: A system with multiple components that have their behav= ior co-ordinated via message passing. These components are usually spatiall= y sepraated and communicate using a network, and may be managed by a single= root of trust or authority. The full paper "Systematizing Decentralization and Privacy" is here, and wh= ile aimed at technical systems designers, should be readable outside of eng= ineering circles: https://www.petsymposium.org/2017/papers/issue4/paper87-2017-4-source.pdf The classic definition of a distributed system we take from Lamport's 1978 = classic: "Time, clocks, and the ordering of events in a distributed system"= Our paper updates this and I would be interested in any other coherent def= initions. yours, harry >=20 > It is an interesting question to see which one of BGP and DNS is the > closest from a "perfect" peer-to-peer ideal. IMHO, BGP is "more P2P" > (there is no root, no tree structure) but the entry barrier is higher > (there are much less AS than domains). >=20 > _______________________________________________ > hrpc mailing list > hrpc@irtf.org > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc >=20 From nobody Mon Feb 5 09:01:01 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BEC0127077 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 09:01:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.449 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yBXo0nQubxv8 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 09:00:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lf0-x22a.google.com (mail-lf0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0C8B912D87B for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 09:00:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lf0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id q194so42711415lfe.13 for ; Mon, 05 Feb 2018 09:00:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=5Yo6R6sk4J8q8Mt7F6eMOi720S8dnePO5MItyE+BhrQ=; b=CXq5ehGKgTu2XUf0kYcViob1kiyVEoCg/ng5Qp4fY5LHXvHj+FKoDyrO+mE/U+IzCQ cXhqzFC5aa6Np5cCPq4tzrdb7EiaI+lJIXpgw3R2Zue7GLIAwFE+rqwx8ChVM4f4cQmE BDZ6HWLd/Eyq5FD9+YeYdEGPJ2gZccQMr4sSB8AvJpFgSxpOHAJsIOxwKNnqzHqrWhzb 7wmFG8pe4tToHmYF84CSahmI34n3ARVnXL2nk+2ztLynKkAnaBTzNuUsxkLvZF5ofv+z JTpFcdNZrLS3n0EHIaMCbTjC6YXFeSH4RBglRPC4+yzPf5gW2iQUd7vrwLGfunEx8S1C WXgA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=5Yo6R6sk4J8q8Mt7F6eMOi720S8dnePO5MItyE+BhrQ=; b=QxreomZuL17l0wrxIujZT/mXGnDR6cCl1Cn4DwuTvpvxe+A+3DOi5oaoIEq1ft+brx tFDkoQlqJcnIS4ha+I18b4unLBrB7phCdbe5Kn9b/ecMkQRJe/ROrsNfLkjJ/pFj8gQC Ucn7viVfcG7Mcowhtztz74RDuOp8rg7OVCKjhvCpZYo+bvYI7vfuamceVSrbY4S9D2tj ziUcx8GvPLApYxKQLJab7k6GMqEWftdr22g+8UXKiLXzsWwCsQ1KHAhFA1BI4AwL6Kq4 OFvgD0Bs8M+fLWFNr0cR8cjwz5tJh2B326ZmnIV2rfnbT1WzIH+z0HKoCbevhATU01vB ARMA== X-Gm-Message-State: AKwxytfyT9oM9a1sMBKOsmte7yk0bbJDyQeoGdUvy44++M2c576W+V1B +kwD4l5ZxDV4TAaTgxaZugiRY+7JmZy652SHObNJUQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x224M/Et7qxvuJwN2do9/jwbFAO0xCnqbIVAcfxfBOiqLVIHyHU0dtWdI/FBv2r4nTlFe4lxOsltYWuecaIzm+2o= X-Received: by 10.25.162.72 with SMTP id l69mr31405097lfe.38.1517850051571; Mon, 05 Feb 2018 09:00:51 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.46.36.4 with HTTP; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 09:00:10 -0800 (PST) From: Shivan Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2018 12:00:10 -0500 Message-ID: To: Hrpc Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11401c9025767105647a01f8" Archived-At: Subject: [hrpc] Thoughts on MLS Internet Draft? X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2018 17:01:00 -0000 --001a11401c9025767105647a01f8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi all, Wondering if anyone had any thoughts on the early draft of MLS (Messaging Layer Security) protocol: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-barnes-mls-protocol/ It'll be used to enable e2e encrypted group chat with forward secrecy, which is a an important and interesting problem with ramifications for human rights groups. Thanks, Shivan --001a11401c9025767105647a01f8 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi all,

Wondering if anyone had any thou= ghts on the early draft of MLS (Messaging Layer Security) protocol:=C2=A0

https://da= tatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-barnes-mls-protocol/

It'll be used to enable e= 2e encrypted group chat with forward secrecy, which is a an important and i= nteresting problem with ramifications for human rights groups.

Thanks,
Shivan
--001a11401c9025767105647a01f8-- From nobody Mon Feb 5 09:13:12 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D68E312D863 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 09:13:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id c1keNrrIjual for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 09:13:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.bortzmeyer.org (aetius.bortzmeyer.org [217.70.190.232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AA1F612D847 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 09:13:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id 8323731D1F; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 18:13:06 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail.sources.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7E7FF1908BF; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 18:10:35 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2018 18:10:35 +0100 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Harry Halpin Cc: Stephane Bortzmeyer , Niels ten Oever , Corinne Cath , hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <20180205171035.4pkgiukbsdi2qghf@sources.org> References: <20180110072053.GA15439@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <20180123100220.GD28814@mir> <20180205082622.tfvi6kvkzeiahnzw@sources.org> <2075755972.1812683.1517849435845.JavaMail.zimbra@inria.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2075755972.1812683.1517849435845.JavaMail.zimbra@inria.fr> X-Transport: UUCP rules X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 9.3 X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] BGP and politics X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2018 17:13:12 -0000 On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 05:50:35PM +0100, Harry Halpin wrote a message of 64 lines which said: > Decentralized system: A distributed system in which multiple > authorities control different components and no single authority is > fully trusted by all others. That's a definition among many others. For instance, other people define "decentralized" by "changing something can be done without any involvment of another actor" (the opposite of "centralized"). > The classic definition of distributed systems is from Lamport: > > Distributed system: A system with multiple components that have > their behavior co-ordinated via message passing. These components > are usually spatially sepraated and communicate using a network, and > may be managed by a single root of trust or authority. It is awfully outdated. By this definition, Gmail is a distributed system. And so is L.root-servers.net. The problem with Lamport's definition (it reflects its age) is that it focus on machines, not on organisations. A distributed system is when there are several authorities, the fact that there are several machines is a detail. From nobody Mon Feb 5 09:42:45 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C58CB1274D2 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 09:42:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sbCXlTC97aak for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 09:42:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E14551273B1 for ; Mon, 5 Feb 2018 09:42:41 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.46,465,1511823600"; d="scan'208";a="312144184" Received: from zmbs3.inria.fr ([128.93.142.16]) by mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 05 Feb 2018 18:42:39 +0100 Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2018 18:42:39 +0100 (CET) From: Harry Halpin To: Stephane Bortzmeyer Cc: Niels ten Oever , Corinne Cath , hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <2122562893.1828327.1517852559698.JavaMail.zimbra@inria.fr> In-Reply-To: <20180205171035.4pkgiukbsdi2qghf@sources.org> References: <20180110072053.GA15439@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <20180123100220.GD28814@mir> <20180205082622.tfvi6kvkzeiahnzw@sources.org> <2075755972.1812683.1517849435845.JavaMail.zimbra@inria.fr> <20180205171035.4pkgiukbsdi2qghf@sources.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Originating-IP: [128.93.85.158] X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.0.9_GA_6191 (ZimbraWebClient - GC62 (Linux)/8.0.9_GA_6191) Thread-Topic: BGP and politics Thread-Index: w3ijLvv4bprxk+PKIZ9BsdKelfm3Kw== Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] BGP and politics X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2018 17:42:45 -0000 ----- Mail original ----- > De: "Stephane Bortzmeyer" > =C0: "Harry Halpin" > Cc: "Stephane Bortzmeyer" , "Niels ten Oever" , "Corinne Cath" > , hrpc@irtf.org > Envoy=E9: Lundi 5 F=E9vrier 2018 18:10:35 > Objet: Re: [hrpc] BGP and politics >=20 > On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 05:50:35PM +0100, > Harry Halpin wrote > a message of 64 lines which said: >=20 > > Decentralized system: A distributed system in which multiple > > authorities control different components and no single authority is > > fully trusted by all others. >=20 > That's a definition among many others. For instance, other people > define "decentralized" by "changing something can be done without any > involvment of another actor" (the opposite of "centralized"). I agree that it's tricky. Perhaps that fits within our definition. If no si= ngle authority needs to be consulted in a given system before changing a co= mponent, then it's a decentralized system.=20 I would be interested in published serious written works (including RFCs) w= ith different definitions. I do think harmonizing definitions is important = for technical interoperability as well as social understanding.=20 >=20 > > The classic definition of distributed systems is from Lamport: > >=20 > > Distributed system: A system with multiple components that have > > their behavior co-ordinated via message passing. These components > > are usually spatially sepraated and communicate using a network, and > > may be managed by a single root of trust or authority. >=20 > It is awfully outdated. By this definition, Gmail is a distributed > system. And so is L.root-servers.net. >=20 > The problem with Lamport's definition (it reflects its age) is that it > focus on machines, not on organisations. A distributed system is when > there are several authorities, the fact that there are several > machines is a detail. >=20 >=20 If there's a better or newer definition, I'd like to know. According to Goo= gle, Gmail is a self-described distributed system, as are most cloud techno= logies. The reason is how to create such technologies are typically taught = in courses on "Distributed Systems" at universities, using in textbooks (i.= e Nancy Lynch textbook) called "Distributed Systems", and most of these sys= tems use a variant of Lamport's Paxos for maintaining state. Of course, it'= s OK to create another definition for "distributed systems" other than the = one used by engineers, but one should then be prepared to confuse most engi= neers and that might not help a genuine interdisciplinary understanding. I = would hope that HPRC documenets are to be read by working engineers, the ki= nd that normally read IETF docs. The key definitional point, phrase it however you will, is that there is no= single trusted authority. On the machine side, an authority may include su= ch simple things like clocks. On the organizational side, this may mean a '= governing body' ranging from a national government (ISO) to the IAB (IETF).= For example, in the paper we point out that Tor has both technical central= ization (directory authorities) and social centralizaiton (i.e. the Tor Pro= ject coders determine commits in a centralized manner) so it doesn't really= count as a fully decentralized system, but a hybrid model (as it does have= peer to peer routing). On the social side, neither the IETF nor the ISO wo= uld count as decentralized. On the standards side, the Open Web Foundation = agreement was the closest I think we had to a "decentralized" standards bod= y, i.e. an agreement anyone could copy without consulting anyone, with the = results all being the same. =20 Perhaps a bitcoin example helps. Enterprise blockchains (federated, permiss= ioned, ala Enterprise Ethereum Alliance) are not decentralized if a single = authority decides "who is in" and "who is out." On the other hand, Bitcoin = as such allows any one to join and independently audit the other components= in the system. So, Bitcoin counts as decentralized (at least on paper, alt= hough in practice there's the large Chinese mining pools in practice).=20 The philosophical question is whether distributed systems have 'several' au= thorities and if real decentralized systems exist with 'no authority.' How= ever, even in p2p systems - usually upheld as some kind of 'pure decentrali= zed system' - one *still* has to trust other people to route your packets, = it's just you can change that trust in decentralized systems. The closest y= ou can come to a 'no authority' system probably would be point-to-point ad-= hoc networks, but there are few working systems in that space. In fact, we = could find only very few and are looking for me. One informal conclusion of= our work is that seems that working systems require some trust relationshi= p, even if it isn't assumed (Don't Trust, Verify!) and thus the system can = be decentralized. From nobody Tue Feb 6 05:05:36 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2421126BF7 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 05:05:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.92 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.92 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Z3gWTfaMIwQv for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 05:05:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09FD312DB70 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 05:05:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ej2wD-0003IM-5X for hrpc@irtf.org; Tue, 06 Feb 2018 14:05:29 +0100 Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2018 14:05:26 +0100 From: Niels ten Oever To: Mallory Knodel Cc: hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <20180206130526.GH26829@mir> References: <20180118094058.xf6amdl3saumvrjr@sources.org> <20180123093625.GF913@mir> <20180124105314.GD4995@mir> <20180124172059.GA13067@mx4.yitter.info> <20180130142731.r4avtmbq33vcs7mf@nic.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="vbzKE9fGfpHIBC6T" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.3 (2018-01-21) X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Scan-Signature: 4a4e1dd80dce9ac0d9378b25a0c059e8 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] About draft-harkins-tls-dragonfly X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2018 13:05:35 -0000 --vbzKE9fGfpHIBC6T Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Stephane, Do you have an architecture in mind, or do you want to have a call or a sep= erate thread on how we best can set this up? Happy to help. Best, Niels On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 09:04:24PM +0300, Mallory Knodel wrote: > On 30/01/18 17:27, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 09:35:08AM -0900, > > Melinda Shore wrote=20 > > a message of 86 lines which said: > >=20 > >> That said, there was review of the document prior to its having > >> entered the publication queue (although it doesn't turn up in the > >> datatracker), and that review (or those reviews) did not find a > >> problem. The review process is probably a good place to start. > >=20 > > I remember that it was discussed in Singapore: what about setting up > > "something" for reviewing drafts about human rights, in the same way > > there are reviews about security, routing, YANG, whatever? The IETF > > being what it is, we don't need anyone's authorization, we can set it > > up ourselves. If it works, we may in the future request some technical > > support (being notified of drafts in Last Call, when there is one) and > > something more "official", but it's not necessary at the start. > >=20 > > Anyone would be interested to volunteer for such an informal team? At > > the beginning, it will be just a mailing list (or may be an issue > > tracker on a Gitlab). >=20 > I'm interested! >=20 > -Mallory >=20 >=20 > --=20 > Mallory Knodel > Head of Digital :: article19.org > gpg fingerprint :: E3EB 63E0 65A3 B240 BCD9 B071 0C32 A271 BD3C C780 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > hrpc mailing list > hrpc@irtf.org > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc --=20 Niels ten Oever Researcher and PhD Candidate Datactive Research Group University of Amsterdam PGP fingerprint 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488 =20 643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3 --vbzKE9fGfpHIBC6T Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEJFgLcFxK/YqUiGQ6Dtg/OkaKyLMFAlp5qBYACgkQDtg/OkaK yLOF+Q/8Cl8iHL04jUolImBZJADmKSS8SuhZQyjpKvA1+decXr3jJq0u83Swcn7C EOI6sOn0c7K7Q1Ihlhcf5LDuHdc/2d5Ya1Ipclo2iqhAotW2tWeDLBmmgLtCpka3 C5HqtNiliUfosdNGFCCaFwa6CUnr9BnfzL7CPdXjjC8RpUaV2Li2RwEujuhfJvNY A62bI7FKBXNhgiG6RW+gmh+QP6KriuPtNLDlN0nVy/7C6Yrr8YS2LNlveBoT3aYZ cCJ/R77WQhRrlgUSP61zhdnOOsJvL9ziP0hthPMuH8hL5v/Xtyav3Wn0+2wPbN/j cADFApTfPQzZh/TsEl6qF1F8FlMxCd5dZO7sfPatSJsLbVt5BRLgXFrRdBy5kuQe vcTtKHCGAMEPXNetHvriH8h3A8zYRY1iE7zxsfWbY3xcOnqIBgnypXyAs5mhD2G2 gViXxOK15MpRVxTp0+ez0kewm6Qly4rBsAmNpSk7y10AnTqUXtBEJwpZa+YdHjNy BAjgVU4sH94xoaN6Ct/oy1EjjbjxHfzja/T/DSWu0rWeX637Cz9uTVGo6Tm+3kgv bNuyzvw8c8qWK1TccbnFApM/SwED3nDrFsTpllZ8VAFpGiY4saxTDfr3Csak8S5C zaABaKDO3b0UgwUCO803G4NJb9WT5WKF4hJQOgA/A8/9th7ZgJM= =Gp9P -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --vbzKE9fGfpHIBC6T-- From nobody Tue Feb 6 05:21:20 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAF0912DB70 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 05:21:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.92 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.92 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id f7E-czqLS7D3 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 05:21:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D74521200B9 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 05:21:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ej3BD-0004o3-I9; Tue, 06 Feb 2018 14:20:59 +0100 Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2018 14:20:56 +0100 From: Niels ten Oever To: Andrew Sullivan Cc: hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <20180206132056.GI26829@mir> References: <21d44e51-ed5a-08ac-ab8e-712235e3c8bc@acm.org> <127d8627-ad2a-f7d2-c385-956999f0a9fd@derechosdigitales.org> <20180123105207.GE28814@mir> <20180124124125.GE4995@mir> <20180124194548.GA13745@anvilwalrusden.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="c8JyeaiReRNoiMDS" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180124194548.GA13745@anvilwalrusden.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.3 (2018-01-21) X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Scan-Signature: 8d37b293d0eb2133598b82226ea2c451 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Freedom of Association on the Internet X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2018 13:21:20 -0000 --c8JyeaiReRNoiMDS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 02:45:56PM -0500, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > > But the users (who are always the rights holders), do need the Internet= to associate. This brings about obligations for the network. When users us= e the Internet to associate, it is also the Internet that should be protect= ed.=20 > > =20 >=20 > The point that I think Melinda is making, and that I have certainly > already tried to make before, is that this use of "the Internet" is > missing what the Internet is. "The Internet" is a noun more like "the > traffic" than "the table": a mass rather than count noun.[1] These two > examples are emergent things made up of many other kinds of > behaviour, each contributing to but not making up the whole. >=20 > On the Internet, the emergence is (partially) because of individuable > networks -- "Autonomous Systems" -- that each voluntarily participate > in the network of networks to make the Internet. But there's an > important caveat: each network is operated exclusively by its > operators, and participates for locally-defined benefit according to > locally-defined needs and desires. >=20 Not completely, right? There are rules ASes need to abide by to be able to = receive an ASN. That is the bare minimum. Next to that other ASes also need= to _want_ to peer with you, else you're still not connected. So there are = pre-conditions. Including use of IP. So there are simple rules that ASes ne= ed to abide by to join the Internet.=20 > In the meat-world, your freedom of association does not extend so far > as to require me to associate with you: it's a negative, not a > positive, right. =20 Gisela already adressed the problems with positive and negative rights, so = I won't repeat the issues here. > If the Internet is made up entirely of ASes > participating freely with one another, and if each AS's participation > is defined according to locally-defined needs and desires, then it > follows that it is _impossible_ to "protect" the Internet in terms of > users' associational abilities. For that would create a positive > obligation on participating ASes out of a negative right on the part > of any given user. And since at a low level there is nothing > signified by "the Internet" except the emergent behaviour of those > independent ASes (and other networks that could be ASes but aren't > yet), there is no other thing to protect and no other obligation that > can accrue. > =20 The ASes agree to engage in a collaboration/association/internetwork which = forms the Internet. It is not something that happens randomly, or as an uni= ntended side-effect. What you describe as emergent, I think is the exact go= al of the action. So I do not think it is an emergent faculty. =20 > > I think the argument we're developing here =E2=80=A6 touches on the que= stion > > of how to build a public space on private infrastructure. >=20 Yes - fully agree.=20 > It does rather more than touch on this. To make that argument work > _at all_, you are either going to need to make some other kind of > argument: >=20 > =E2=80=A2 Claim that there is a social need that trumps the private n= ature > of the participating ASes. >=20 Such as human rights, right? > =E2=80=A2 Work in somehow the always-tricky issue of collective right= s and > obligations without individual obligation. >=20 You mean collective responsibility and voluntary norms? > =E2=80=A2 Define into existence some new network of last resort that = has > the positive obligation to carry traffic when nobody else does. >=20 Why? > =E2=80=A2 Define "the Internet" to be something other than the emerge= nt > propery of those individual networks participating voluntarily, > and explain what that is. >=20 Challenge accepted (but I feel this is gonna lead down a real deep (but pro= bably exciting) rabbithole. > As it stands, I do not think the draft makes any attempt to do any of > those, and I think that may be the core problem. >=20 That might be right, we're working hard on re-drafting according to all ext= remly helpful e-mail. But I couldn't help myself but to respond :) > In addition, I don't know how you do any of these without make a > pretty strong distinction between "network operator" and "everyone > else", where "everyone else" is going to include very large network > operators that have an AS and do routing selectively. But, of course, > we already _had_ a network that had those properties. It was the > telephone network, with rights, obligations, and roles carefully > delineated by regulations and government-granted monopoly rights. We > can observe some of that in, for instance, the "last mile" networks in > many places. But I am pretty far from convinced that any right to > freedom of association would be made more operative by reinventing the > legal and regulatory regime that made possible telco monopolies the > world over; or by revivifying the bureaucratic, > government-and-insiders-only nature of international telegraphy > treaties. The lowest-level Internet infrastructure operations club is > undoubtedly hard to join, and the club certainly doesn't accept that > others have a right of association. It is still worlds easier to join > than the club of governments, whose members are even more hostile to > new applicants. >=20 I am not sure whether a legal and regulatory regime, treaties or joining th= e infra ops club are the only options. But let's further dissect the proble= m before we try to come up with solutions. Thanks again. Niels > Best regards, >=20 > A >=20 > [1] That is not to say that "internet" is a mass noun. You can have > two internets. But all the internets are the Internet, and if you add > more internets you still have one Internet. >=20 > --=20 > Andrew Sullivan > ajs@anvilwalrusden.com >=20 > _______________________________________________ > hrpc mailing list > hrpc@irtf.org > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc --=20 Niels ten Oever Researcher and PhD Candidate Datactive Research Group University of Amsterdam PGP fingerprint 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488 =20 643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3 --c8JyeaiReRNoiMDS Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEJFgLcFxK/YqUiGQ6Dtg/OkaKyLMFAlp5q7gACgkQDtg/OkaK yLMnKA//fR+TzUCn6+U/ETNQpiXzJ2UPLyhEsZX+4eYvnssvmFC+bxcS0IrQcQSh T3Wo5A4OYkAD6x0FNyKzOtF5hoqijODDeKTmBVbVqMXcx2z2sUHeQtHPwLgT2DWl zdnLzrP1350dfG/oz9rHoTK4yGZeaM22vEPBEyMD0YcBJplQMa1bWxE3n8de68P5 57I5QtUiJkksVKTc25vtHJwbkoKBNO5RKDilN34W4x/3xnBGAnkOoZOtJFpigh7n ahzXOjERK3a765MWzagWv5lQl9aq4SsfE1DTD77D8rR1vawmUoZ+9PCDtyv/7PK+ uWDIL0w209GJyxezNhP8y9QO+BXlX3pg/a0vDSnfPqZhwFxyOA09WAHadPy8i7gS KYlufEPAivmVb0Cwjm4iwkWT5BPaymhxfQGcFncrnLvY5pxIASEt+zEB+zxEx4J3 XALmQG335RfGPAr0+ut6kOFjkXLWMmtGXeRdyyUDvV/RzDEfYDHxMSb7ILaK0tOy OJo3LVcfUsvzzlDadhG/ACrrLQCC0+9oJH6e/di5Sspith3T5HIiRhIxHr1NJMBL cHk//wad6SGoxS9QwWqDblSXz2f0VfuYLAFHLfmjMiwXZ+fRV4phpJi72aRHi2TS 7YUC0C2v0jMwXrzatXbx80ek5XiZPPCyCxaTATC9T2t2qhgwIOo= =BG5Y -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --c8JyeaiReRNoiMDS-- From nobody Tue Feb 6 08:21:07 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B05BE12E876 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 08:21:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.92 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.92 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zUdqe03pwTih for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 08:21:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE87E12E866 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 08:21:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ej5zR-0000D6-3k for hrpc@irtf.org; Tue, 06 Feb 2018 17:21:01 +0100 To: hrpc@irtf.org References: <02e0869e-c056-1c97-5242-b6004b1ca197@cs.tcd.ie> <42ba3afc-5caf-1d2e-2fe8-f9f1cf92eeef@derechosdigitales.org> <20171128181604.cszih4nbzuoz23sj@mx4.yitter.info> From: Niels ten Oever Message-ID: <2e49a500-59bd-7a6c-38bb-26ff479d6b38@article19.org> Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2018 17:20:59 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20171128181604.cszih4nbzuoz23sj@mx4.yitter.info> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="X1RiLWN1fGnxG2i0WKehlgmk2y7rDwhZv" X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Scan-Signature: 92147cc26b2e14e0b1010f762ef587ae Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] draft-tenoever-hrpc-association-02 X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2018 16:21:06 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --X1RiLWN1fGnxG2i0WKehlgmk2y7rDwhZv Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Ixfk18UaQ61wTB32P9k0BLcxOIzRPujl1"; protected-headers="v1" From: Niels ten Oever To: hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <2e49a500-59bd-7a6c-38bb-26ff479d6b38@article19.org> Subject: Re: [hrpc] draft-tenoever-hrpc-association-02 References: <02e0869e-c056-1c97-5242-b6004b1ca197@cs.tcd.ie> <42ba3afc-5caf-1d2e-2fe8-f9f1cf92eeef@derechosdigitales.org> <20171128181604.cszih4nbzuoz23sj@mx4.yitter.info> In-Reply-To: <20171128181604.cszih4nbzuoz23sj@mx4.yitter.info> --Ixfk18UaQ61wTB32P9k0BLcxOIzRPujl1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, On 11/28/2017 07:16 PM, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > Hi, >=20 > On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 06:09:59PM -0600, Gisela Perez de Acha wrote: >> >=20 >> 2. I loved Andrew=E2=80=99s definition of =E2=80=9Cthe Internet=E2=80=9D= because I think it >> talks about an assembly: an emergent-process-driven thing that is born= >> from the collections of the ASes that happen to be gathered together a= t >> any given time. The fact that they tend to interact at any given time,= >> it=E2=80=99s an emergent property that happens because they use the pr= otocols >> defined at IETF. >=20 > I am not sure that's quite what I said, but I do think it's not quite > what I meant. Nevertheless, there's something you're tugging on that > is in line with my point. >=20 >> 1. The OSCE-ODIHR Guidelines on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly define >> assembly as an intentional and temporary presence of a number of >> individuals in a public place for a common expressive purpose. ( Sourc= e >> https://www.osce.org/odihr/73405?download=3Dtrue). Is this definition >> enough? Can =E2=80=9Cmachines=E2=80=9D or =E2=80=9Cnodes within an AS=E2= =80=9D can be considered as an >> individual for this purpose? >=20 > The problem this raises is that "the Internet" is an ongoing > phenomenon, and "assembly" in that definition is not. >=20 > This was the point I was trying to make about "the traffic". When I > say, "The traffic is heavy on the 401, and never drops below 60% or > 70% of road capacity," what I'm saying is that there's this ongoing > phenomenon of vehicles being in relation to one another, without any > of the individual vehicles staying the same. >=20 > This is _not_ the definition of assembly you're using: assembly is > _this group_ of individuals, and they're gathered temporarily. >=20 > So, you might say that the nature of freedom of the Internet arises > out of a freedom of assembly that is internetworking: any arbitrary > set of network operators (you don't need ASes for this, I think) can > network their networks together, and get an internet. The totality of > that behaviour together in the world is the emergent thing called > _the_ Internet. Any given member or set of members can refuse or fail > to participate to some extent, which means that the Internet is fuzzy. > The individual network operators who are internetworking might meet > the definition of "assembly" you've been using, but the Internet does > not get that even transitively. >=20 > Does that make sense? This makes a lot of sense. For me this answers the question 'Is the Internet an assembly?' Because the Internet not temporary, therefore it is not an assembly. Now we should seek to answer the question whether the Internet is an association (but I think the research question will also look a bit different in the next version). Thanks a lot! Niels >=20 > Best regards, >=20 > A >=20 >=20 --Ixfk18UaQ61wTB32P9k0BLcxOIzRPujl1-- --X1RiLWN1fGnxG2i0WKehlgmk2y7rDwhZv Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEJFgLcFxK/YqUiGQ6Dtg/OkaKyLMFAlp51esACgkQDtg/OkaK yLPMug/+OLrcne3RhecwA7EhgDlZjAkqMlZOEtm0w6tS2LaES12KZ9KURk92dLA3 dnnSEYNQ0nEfiBgQ9GTvtIONC2B0Nms1sW5euZaq3uhR8y1m3VBQ/awlFBF4kXt/ TFNOj0988brlJQoLwxJTHuDqtbMMCZjnwEoUbHlVBRM+zk/VAwpRDH88nVfeDsci rlpAdPXhfgtQMuk+/9NMHkpWmRcWEFhVw2ovPflXiP7A+Yf8MeOU4DofwCPhaa4o /EoAR3nnyMJW27pDqo0k4zd7Zvbd80sifXIPBnY8d+xLQEpd/7ppHLhPMLvJ/TdB DM61jJkmejH8Dz8sRQ23S16vcL5P1Q41m3hjjbt4sdIYBf6tuOdNDFnL8JYMlADf KwEXq1qykvvMw3zPISwQp6Ao7sD+g9sfmPAcGF2MaH/6uRqt3WvNaJP3onRLLSAy mhpFE8+tuKu656mynpdApmG4PiQyFaYZQlfP6Zdt2ood7DQK0Gfw7qOf2Ejz9wuf 3gLLvExCo9wvlI6mkTCchPZ6d0q0umaxuWyFU1rGmcCXwA9m8WJcHaBODPEyFCwD IgDcQbF/qGsy9jz9/HOhi6S0O6Nl1u8lUAAbh+VHOPRDNylxOAiFaDJqdrmjslGW k7rI5sw/jtLAaRC7p52zzrxQa1YjKMd+0GqK0Vlv0bY00L+PAYo= =hHO1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --X1RiLWN1fGnxG2i0WKehlgmk2y7rDwhZv-- From nobody Tue Feb 6 08:25:51 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24F5F1270A7 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 08:25:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.921 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.921 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MAF5WsxNWgtc for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 08:25:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 02DC6127078 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 08:25:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ej641-0000sn-LY; Tue, 06 Feb 2018 17:25:45 +0100 To: hrpc@irtf.org, jefsey@jefsey.com References: <02e0869e-c056-1c97-5242-b6004b1ca197@cs.tcd.ie> <42ba3afc-5caf-1d2e-2fe8-f9f1cf92eeef@derechosdigitales.org> <20171128181604.cszih4nbzuoz23sj@mx4.yitter.info> <20171203234742.E9415124BE8@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Niels ten Oever Message-ID: <0f1626eb-576b-6647-00eb-06b30818f938@article19.org> Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2018 17:25:44 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20171203234742.E9415124BE8@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="mS3p0cqwwVaeeXxkinebjMgGOQeypUBS8" X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Scan-Signature: 40b81d93390a3dca3ee709c9c36a2335 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] draft-tenoever-hrpc-association-02 X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2018 16:25:49 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --mS3p0cqwwVaeeXxkinebjMgGOQeypUBS8 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="a0sLC3B6ntagDYOSdyIVaC8do0Mq1FERY"; protected-headers="v1" From: Niels ten Oever To: hrpc@irtf.org, jefsey@jefsey.com Message-ID: <0f1626eb-576b-6647-00eb-06b30818f938@article19.org> Subject: Re: [hrpc] draft-tenoever-hrpc-association-02 References: <02e0869e-c056-1c97-5242-b6004b1ca197@cs.tcd.ie> <42ba3afc-5caf-1d2e-2fe8-f9f1cf92eeef@derechosdigitales.org> <20171128181604.cszih4nbzuoz23sj@mx4.yitter.info> <20171203234742.E9415124BE8@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20171203234742.E9415124BE8@ietfa.amsl.com> --a0sLC3B6ntagDYOSdyIVaC8do0Mq1FERY Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 12/04/2017 12:47 AM, Jefsey wrote: > Gaines' one : "we [the users] are the internet". Do you have a source for that by any chance? I would like to add it to the glossary as one of the definitions. Thanks! Niels --a0sLC3B6ntagDYOSdyIVaC8do0Mq1FERY-- --mS3p0cqwwVaeeXxkinebjMgGOQeypUBS8 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEJFgLcFxK/YqUiGQ6Dtg/OkaKyLMFAlp51wgACgkQDtg/OkaK yLMDoxAAnjMwyHhklm9zcYyOo8ue//IRUnm8VBDnRHB0lzE40Awefsp/nu0T+EL3 P0/J36O82Lj+CSvsrewuZbvwBTl0tl9J77Uakff/xtXwyreNcv4vl+9lnzXXVX8U HrPVl1HztyiV+TxGym0bZa2/T6zpOFB+WLAT82nlm2Zonq7LIRw4vz/graajGYna 1MXoct5oEfZ2s64Ts4ezujHv9Iy3+tOJibuJMeqeQOeBEbSLr2+i3UoyPqa9Bamx R2v1ltLYpHBzFFA6y/VE2m5p8fcLUpv/xCVXDu648XUfp+BVKxL9zNrM7FH+4PZq WfMVFldfT1hzYTJ7pHFJy+NOhsCBQJHhFJaFXFt/X6Zpfkb9SUbst22ODDsNI1SC /KXYkljsO07bQYP21QFlxFeNQ1n/VjukLlvQZsvBLmzRfAXuJAvf6xxN9KmfMBIB Dcs/xOi9ZdLroLXC7FnjcZq/R6CrtKH0G6+kIzcSW3AKTmTavc3xe6cDSfW2l2Fz wD7gInAcwTut2ai+C+84uxOThdTRmMsBg6nWBYajof+p6kMGHMT+QQH0y9yvYGBU k8b4dZPOh/SB/VqTmNnUUccIfhvL72cAOqj0BUG+XP4opeGH98BBrxJXWL7NJug+ tGly4U1s4St36SU4EVHPXc+khDnpzt6/ObFREpWnrf1rX3r0114= =tKyB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --mS3p0cqwwVaeeXxkinebjMgGOQeypUBS8-- From nobody Tue Feb 6 13:09:49 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EA18127909 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 13:09:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0UEpfP_av7xg for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 13:09:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ot0-x230.google.com (mail-ot0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c0f::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C8CA6127873 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 13:09:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ot0-x230.google.com with SMTP id q12so3104629otg.10 for ; Tue, 06 Feb 2018 13:09:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=0rmAa76khq64RYUE1bRXaU15mLCg+/F4l1G/kY18BZw=; b=lZE1tQqUXR40l03fdv4OXsWfeTvB441ffVgRuiFyy5DR+AA4SFkaFFSHR3xXNUAsZ+ Y/xvxu/l8ERitbzl0ufQPsf86idudRJj8BvvInzz303uq7bBhZh9y4XhSEabAQ2nx0su qUXqqEzVxEdcgCbB7zx6pH1llfiwtCXHMYfpvkMrrRJxqxZnWhteec2lvmkS7Ve7s9mc 0jYKuj3MkaESck1A7BP6BshYA/TTN/EaF9btpXNh9yv3hAYg9OPytJbEGLEIiK7B9TJP pR3u6qhoOYo6gks6ExzFJp7KW8uTJZRRX7LpuYbQtFPtpFxiVBcPTfw0EHFPTyxBVxbZ i+sQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=0rmAa76khq64RYUE1bRXaU15mLCg+/F4l1G/kY18BZw=; b=edQhui54CR5kzWmGn0x9nVls+pAyo9YYO6lEvRLUMKaQP+b5y0wyXBWKseCI0vVM2t DBncMzOoi5v7Qbxy04TCNZXMkAhgqB+DkSBmnbe8nNKrr4/fa27ylFoAhsYp/+p3o3hI KnMCbnKkFelW6FuO9npOVpWQPP+8vciDghH36OoQZj/4DFXlWV552OLom4Wlh4oXX19T CJlSgpXH+8YmsUt5xXwZ4MCyqxWT4vVAKqNd0Qk8Q4R6GruPCw+Y48DhYdKYsUjBQ1v6 KMMGI2ADsZj9pILbOeKYpGWuUiU/VfVllERCOOVcPw96WgrvDuUxreiPk6ZK3xgwag5u Vz2Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPB2HVJDxzs0jzcnwyYLCfHUK9iNVvit3qD8eiw/RZrE1BCLYzCg u9LS/q3UWp/+BBKDfOvz86o= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x224SO808wNf76VqyUSYB9Z74bRAU/YltrfgGbv8jtF0rNHNNBVqZW71If6UGv2IGQhGMzrqrYA== X-Received: by 10.157.24.14 with SMTP id b14mr2957401ote.195.1517951383927; Tue, 06 Feb 2018 13:09:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2600:8802:5600:f::101d? ([2600:8802:5600:f::101d]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p205sm1344179oia.41.2018.02.06.13.09.41 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 06 Feb 2018 13:09:42 -0800 (PST) From: Fred Baker Message-Id: <6249C479-295B-4D00-B66F-BB6F358C10C8@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_367C1D6E-75C1-4756-9820-A69A54993873"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.3 \(3445.6.9\)) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2018 13:09:40 -0800 In-Reply-To: <0f1626eb-576b-6647-00eb-06b30818f938@article19.org> Cc: hrpc@irtf.org, jefsey@jefsey.com To: Niels ten Oever References: <02e0869e-c056-1c97-5242-b6004b1ca197@cs.tcd.ie> <42ba3afc-5caf-1d2e-2fe8-f9f1cf92eeef@derechosdigitales.org> <20171128181604.cszih4nbzuoz23sj@mx4.yitter.info> <20171203234742.E9415124BE8@ietfa.amsl.com> <0f1626eb-576b-6647-00eb-06b30818f938@article19.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.6.9) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] draft-tenoever-hrpc-association-02 X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2018 21:09:47 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_367C1D6E-75C1-4756-9820-A69A54993873 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I won't say that Jeffsey is wrong, but I will say that he has given one = of several possible definitions. He's not particularly *right*. Personally, I would look back to the documents written by the early = Internet pioneers and their use of the term. These would include early = RFCs, INWG documents, and so on. = http://alexmckenzie.weebly.com/inwg-and-the-conception-of-the-internet-an-= eyewitness-account.html is an interesting article in context, as is RFC = 675, which is the first RFC that I find using the term. What I find is that the term was used without a formal definition, but = in every early context in which I find it, it is the domain in which an = Internet Protocol packet might wander. RFC 675 is an early definition of = what today we call TCP, and is used between the endpoints of such = sessions. The other word that is used in that context is "internetwork", = used as an adjective and as a verb ("internetworking"). For clarity, a contrast needs to be drawn with the word "catenet", which = was used in the same timeframe to refer to "concatenated networks". An = example of this is the Network-to-Network-Interface (NNI) definition = from the ITU specifying a data circuit composed of a sequence of Frame = Relay DLCs and ATM VCs; one sets up an end to end circuit composed of a = random set of those, and whenever the circuit sees to change protocols, = there is a defined algorithm for the translation. It's Y.1417, IIRC. One = can set up a circuit, and transfer data from end to end using that = circuit, without knowing the set of companies or technologies the path = traverses, and data can travel end to end without being bumped up to a = higher layer such as the Internet Protocol. That was a common view of = networking in the 1970s, and even into the 1980s and 1990s in some = technologies and SDOs; I heard it most recently in the SGIP context, = where some wanted to implement gateways at the edges of every Smart Grid = network to translate to the next. The Internet is not a catenet - it is not a concatenated set of link = layer technologies. Rather, each network implements whatever it likes, = which might be an IP network, some random overlay, Ethernet here, Token = Ring there, and MPLS somewhere else, or whatever else, and presents an = IP-to-IP interface at its interconnects to other networks. There is no = circuit, and no call setup. Rather, some device somewhere sends a = packet, it wanders in whatever way it wanders, and it arrives somewhere = else - the two places being specified by the source and destination = addresses in the packet. The way the term was used by those that = invented it (and failed to formally define it) was a set of networks = that operated in some respects as a single larger network, a network of = networks, using one addressing system and one internetworking protocol = end to end. To repeat: The Internet is a network of networks interconnected using = the Internet Protocol. Feeding exactly that sentence into Google, I come up with a number of = interesting articles. One you could refer to, if you like, is = https://www.igi-global.com/dictionary/internet/15369. It lists 93 = different definitions, mostly taking the next higher view of the network = that I have also often found people using. Definition 89 has it = referring to the network that connects computers: "Internet is an = electronic network connecting billions of computers globally", while = definition 92 has it being the computers that are interconnected by = networks: "Network of networks of computers". I would actually push back pretty hard on the concept that the Internet = is fundamentally a set of people, if only because many important points = on the Internet are not people. Consider, if you will, the Internet of = Things; it is comprised of a set of services of various kinds that = communicate in various ways with a variety of sensors and actuators - = telemetry devices and things that might be controlled after evaluation = of those inputs in the context of some policy. There are people that are = ultimately served by it and people that care about its operation, but as = far as IOT itself is concerned, there is no human in the loop. That's = why it's called the Internet of THINGS, in comparison to the Internet = used by PEOPLE. Consider also the number of services in the network that = are involved with even the simplest things a human user does - if I'm = curious how many people live in Thailand, for example, I turn on = tcpdump, open a browser, type "how many people live in Thailand", close = tcpdump, and discover that I have captured 7149 messages exchanged with = 44 peers in 46 identifiable sessions. I'll send you the file if you're = interested. As far as I, the human, was concerned, I asked one question = of one party - Google. You don't even want to think about how many = entities were involved in the discussion. If I'm talking about the Internet and what it is, I'd stick to the = Internet itself, as opposed to what fits my predisposition... > On Feb 6, 2018, at 8:25 AM, Niels ten Oever = wrote: >=20 >=20 > On 12/04/2017 12:47 AM, Jefsey wrote: >> Gaines' one : "we [the users] are the internet". >=20 > Do you have a source for that by any chance? I would like to add it to > the glossary as one of the definitions. >=20 > Thanks! >=20 > Niels >=20 > _______________________________________________ > hrpc mailing list > hrpc@irtf.org > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc --Apple-Mail=_367C1D6E-75C1-4756-9820-A69A54993873 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEctjlJjQmVrp9uMq7EhdRnd2GP+AFAlp6GZQACgkQEhdRnd2G P+AacA/7Bx6NKP0Z9DwhGaBEOmWy0363ZiRSpCdCeRDCGkofdT7lER8BpNNmROqM oPDlJheTBjKvNOhZoR+gxn2W2sXufQanzIK9kfsF8DP9uLf0Q2u+Ufsu1Mg/vQF/ mIGPtUcL5m4KyFDadvP91lD+5y+GWf4GMQCrzEziWejuJb7jAGZqff1S/1a+QcmM ZxtrumysXasLplz1UCV99DxcAjY9wCCaCtnr3pRwXLx3DniYl7Nk9IeNplYaiJJ1 nCvo9zw0a4mDHEE2O0N55BHlEbKp9U5BuTcORxXpVpcjhRYaBdEPXkv4Sojm5ODe v9FwIPo68y8ILyJUKv30LcrYwVK0/TdnpkUguMinPEQ7Ag3NsmIMvmqDViW+55Ae Xy4sqBKJrJ3vrhQu8gx8L0rn08JxDt3S5DTRETSjYb3H91xlFJ9V/sQzpslOKgMN j67XTktFAx6ZncmIBtgSCqJtfd6bOKilLl8SuxYscgMCxXIzZuHsYCGz5Eq6Tqc+ Kxvij0/vqLGfazE/BmUewtP0KZ67oz4WK6kBH3jiuUMHLr/9l+9QCuG2O4gkvdAn wFHD6Ts4S1pRBD1Bs5cX6wEqC1Oi6TwIm+PIxoxJ2iPC2iNMpvJyx+kgX0+x5hDF i0HyzAShc6FNoJ1tuGOyafNpuhw95hJW3AkFQS8ETLyHOL0ir1M= =Zhll -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_367C1D6E-75C1-4756-9820-A69A54993873-- From nobody Tue Feb 6 13:26:04 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD3D7128D2E for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 13:26:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.921 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.921 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uj7p-xRfzdqP for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 13:26:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC11D12D945 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 13:26:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ejAkX-0003el-Vo for hrpc@irtf.org; Tue, 06 Feb 2018 22:25:58 +0100 To: hrpc@irtf.org References: <20171111132647.GA5997@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> From: Niels ten Oever Message-ID: Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2018 22:25:56 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20171111132647.GA5997@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="3PIotA7dUdd4mK0cwy8N11g8894IGLIFA" X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Scan-Signature: aaa3b708a984912a81ea67a52d88c378 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] About draft-tenoever-hrpc-association X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2018 21:26:03 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --3PIotA7dUdd4mK0cwy8N11g8894IGLIFA Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="82v6hLaPrarLIWUvOKDxi5d3q57gwJwmD"; protected-headers="v1" From: Niels ten Oever To: hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: Subject: Re: [hrpc] About draft-tenoever-hrpc-association References: <20171111132647.GA5997@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> In-Reply-To: <20171111132647.GA5997@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> --82v6hLaPrarLIWUvOKDxi5d3q57gwJwmD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, On 11/11/2017 02:26 PM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > [About version -02] >=20 >> spam infringes both rights if an op-out [sic] mechanism is not >> provided >=20 > Why opt-out? Giving the amount of spam sources, this is completely > unscalable (you cannot unsubscribe faster than marketers subscribe > you). >=20 Maybe we should drop the whole paragraph about spam. Especially since there is less and less scientific proof that a filter bubble actually exists. >> namely the possibility of centralized policy making on the >> management and operation of domain names >=20 > Let's be precise: the DNS is not centralized (if it were, you would > have to talk to ICANN each time you change an IP address). >=20 I don't think the text says that the DNS is centralized, but the current hierarchical structuring does allow for a centralized venue for policy making vis a vis the DNS, right? >> 6.4.2. ASes >=20 > This section does not talk about network neutrality, which could be a > good idea. >=20 Let's see if we can come up with a session about routing, economic costs and maybe refer to net neutrality? Let's see what we can make of it. Suggestions always welcome. Best, Niels --82v6hLaPrarLIWUvOKDxi5d3q57gwJwmD-- --3PIotA7dUdd4mK0cwy8N11g8894IGLIFA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEJFgLcFxK/YqUiGQ6Dtg/OkaKyLMFAlp6HWUACgkQDtg/OkaK yLOM3w//VWyJAf0RGG8ccICarJQgAvzl0GR7LLYBOnpRvNPEXHplzvrY+oHuFdPn aIJbXrpju21IlB8W/VyyoECH1KLHtzZRUrZu0iZLj387iVwpQ7xOcLIRYZ/U/U/Z vZ/F9wHmiJrzY26o0EnaU+AwF6MJJPs6rhpanaaz4Ocdr19By55HI5Ps1NtlUpMS Iglz+tKzOfBZxQlbVqcdZrpSRTtmCEKiSQhpHMdP19U+NkiJAISb7KYPDzagKTgq o5YEr1jq+v4u52hL9TSFbOiRX0coSvE+lT/J3/3rWoKMymgmgRAGt+hn/eUVZmT7 jg4NsCZ4jD0mjmRmGzP8LKRosMHMsuX726wWYhBKRBv1t2Zm4VGA6Ei6aI3RJH/B +CrQ46K54FMalnEyOB89U14qUgxKTqcmIIc3rVxhuSdp66oX5AE2ZR+1lhv/6ZX7 NKd0aN8ie00saNSDNHsa5GWyjPRh7Uo8MnTIIgSTw/lYiyAvlEes+1Xr3DXINh3U s7MRkY4LGccIpYIv50YH/C3nATSD7uhQgVQqihC5P+npQwB4J4QrtrTuP3Edp6Ea /Q3BMBxROeaJETOzrDYTmfKR6liEDZvqnx6dQ7n9M1JAIGvZiLbChr7h7+7UD7Fn gl9lRorGO8agOZL+mTKG52Y9A2Ac9lhtZv6x6PIJ1W7ESQuAPMA= =HAIp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --3PIotA7dUdd4mK0cwy8N11g8894IGLIFA-- From nobody Tue Feb 6 21:31:01 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E8E4126B6E for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 21:31:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yitter.info header.b=NsMYDKBH; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yitter.info header.b=Yd97kn5A Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id luH3ydpXjjmt for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 21:30:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.yitter.info (mx4.yitter.info [159.203.56.111]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 00E431200E5 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2018 21:30:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTP id 846A7BD363 for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2018 05:30:56 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1517981456; bh=D0OP8x44XzJ3DNu/VoCmjp+s+RdsF0wZWo8eKthSuAg=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=NsMYDKBHMFt8n87MidipyMcN+BUGkEsteC1qeuUb5s9cJWPoVr+fnHHm5QZpqr4NB HUUsvEBgUQIsKxnKzTs2XaU80WWsLeCjUmHzAu1QSDHh5BMhvzlUkh/IbYxk3nM4Jv Kan4vij7Btwv8/OyBhdOk12WrU0ntjbO9wM6yRM8= X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at crankycanuck.ca Received: from mx4.yitter.info ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx4.yitter.info [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7-5xOWKu-04V for ; Wed, 7 Feb 2018 05:30:54 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2018 00:30:52 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1517981454; bh=D0OP8x44XzJ3DNu/VoCmjp+s+RdsF0wZWo8eKthSuAg=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Yd97kn5Am2vPFz0aLUsQJ7ZgmiusxNuVsFcQpEr1fBbgTTs0lqEtrC/FDCpPtG2gH F9/k/zlgpJI9UGY1T7sC84bCFR0NsXH8r0w5xAhdwSJRTa6qmZtRGZDsQp2bCEqsIP qXCG+0T7aZNZgAGM2ZGe5eTglPWHM+y5A6XW8ZN8= From: Andrew Sullivan To: hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <20180207053052.GA1834@mx4.yitter.info> References: <21d44e51-ed5a-08ac-ab8e-712235e3c8bc@acm.org> <127d8627-ad2a-f7d2-c385-956999f0a9fd@derechosdigitales.org> <20180123105207.GE28814@mir> <20180124124125.GE4995@mir> <20180124194548.GA13745@anvilwalrusden.com> <20180206132056.GI26829@mir> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20180206132056.GI26829@mir> Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Freedom of Association on the Internet X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2018 05:31:00 -0000 Hi, On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 02:20:56PM +0100, Niels ten Oever wrote: > > operators, and participates for locally-defined benefit according to > > locally-defined needs and desires. > > > Not completely, right? There are rules ASes need to abide by to be > able to receive an ASN. That is the bare minimum.Next to that other > ASes also need to _want_ to peer with you, else you're still not > connected. So there are pre-conditions. Including use of IP. So > there are simple rules that ASes need to abide by to join the > Internet. If you join a semi-public conversation in a bus, you have to speak that vernacular, not creep people out, and so on. Also, you need to want to participate, which presumes that you are getting something out of it. Do you have a _right_ to join the conversation? I rather hope not, or else I rather hope that the meaning of "right" is considerably weaker than it seems to be in contemporary socio-political discourse. > > In the meat-world, your freedom of association does not extend so far > > as to require me to associate with you: it's a negative, not a > > positive, right. > > Gisela already adressed the problems with positive and negative rights, so I won't repeat the issues here. > Well, to be fair, my reading of Gisela's response was "this isn't academically fashionable right now, so you're wrong," but here's what she actually said: > the division between positive/negative rights has been left behind > for almost a decade now in human rights law theory and practice. > Traditionally, civil and political rights were deemed as "negative > obligations" for the State (mainly respecting, not interfering) > whereas economical, social and cultural rights were "positive > obligations" (fostering, paying, etc). Now we understand that > freedom of expression should be respected by states, but also > fostered in positive ways. I still don't understand how any of that responds to the main point I was making. The draft as it stands appears to me to conjure into being the requirement that any given AS -- or maybe only some ASes, I am not sure -- MUST route the packets of (some?) other ASes as a matter of the right of association. This strikes me as the sort of massive elevation of political preference to "a right" that underpins Bentham's original description of natural rights. I simply do not see how anything in the Internet architecutre allows someone to insist on the right of free packet passage. I really _want_ that passage, and think it is an unalloyed good thing. But I do not see why (and the draft provides, as far as I can tell, zero argument for why) this is a "right" as opposed to the collectively self-interested way by which everyone gets a global Internet. I don't see anything in the UDHR that requires association with anyone else; indeed Article 20(2) says that I can't be compelled to associate. If the Internet is an association, then if all the associates refuse to associate with one another they are exercising their right under 20(2). This means that the right to association in 20(1) and non-association in 20(2) can't provide an even minimally coherent story about internetworking-as-association. It _might_ provide some story about association _using_ the Internet (over email or file shareing or Facebook or YouTube or whatever). None of that has anything to do with "protocol considerations", however, unless I've missed something pretty important in the last year. I suppose what I am saying is that, in my view, the global Internet (in the protocol-layers sense) is a permanently unstable political fact of self-interest, rather than something that anyone is owed by right. That doesn't mean that there are no rights that accrue to users of applications as those applications become part of the wider social reality, nor even that high-level uses of the Internet might not entail something for users covered bu the UDHR. What is mystifying to me is how to transform any such candidate right into something that constrains the UDHR 20(2) right of non-association in a way that means the Internet can't fall apart. > The ASes agree No. In the moment of routing, one AS "agrees" with another AS. Your phrase makes it sound like a permanent or at least somehow nominatively stable arrangement. But for a lot of AS-AS pairings (not always in direct relation), that's simply not true. This is not a contract universe. "Best efforts" isn't a joke. > to engage in a collaboration/association/internetwork which forms > the Internet. It is not something that happens randomly, or as an > unintended side-effect. What you describe as emergent, I think is > the exact goal of the action. So I do not think it is an emergent > faculty. You describe this as a static thing, but I think it's emergent _exactly_ because of how dynamic it is, and how few explicit agreements there are. I wonder whether you have a circuit-ish picture of the Internet. See Fred Baker's message elsewhere on list for a quite good outline of why circuit-ish is wrong. > > • Claim that there is a social need that trumps the private nature > > of the participating ASes. > > > > Such as human rights, right? I am unaware of any UDHR provision that takes some individual's (not government) property -- or even certain corporations' property -- and guarantees others use of it. It still seems a stretch. > > > • Work in somehow the always-tricky issue of collective rights and > > obligations without individual obligation. > > > > You mean collective responsibility and voluntary norms? If the document is about collective, voluntary norms to support voluntary participation in the network according to local voluntary criteria, what is it adding to the Internet? If instead the idea is that any Internet-participating node Must Be This Tall, I want to know who appointed the arbiter and how I know it is decent. And so on. I fear that the draft is foundering on an extraordinarily naïve interpretation of "the Internet". A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com From nobody Thu Feb 8 06:03:38 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F98912AF77 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 06:03:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.586 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.586 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=0.723, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=open-xchange.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OOErfUcLgOvU for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 06:03:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.open-xchange.com (alcatraz.open-xchange.com [87.191.39.187]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3450B12D961 for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 06:03:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from open-xchange.com (imap.open-xchange.com [10.20.30.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx4.open-xchange.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49DDB6A560; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 15:03:34 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=open-xchange.com; s=201705; t=1518098614; bh=/O5mrZq652HyXcfL1qkCz5mYriVzTnPgxsVaNZ5InIY=; h=Date:From:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From; b=g4kd16DLS3mrXn0xYelSfyIiTyi+2KzKReGp1G0u2Pdjh6ZVraiELPqP5s5Qb3rz2 iZrv6nFqVf23QdSvxVkT/3wt5HLGTZ16HqhAgVY4h3pU7N0X/NeARGv3LF6Asjxuap Zp3bXAJxJfsiHnFY3naYBGr2QH5mGVn5+8KdLc4kC5nCTH9yvjicW4J1q0qKjD4QUf 1gg6ynDN2iIThH0af4UimJYa6HT3uHJrFRErHob9NEvNQkEtvPIgAEbtdh+tcJQKE4 HkNBqmtiu+eUdBWYncMgpQ/Q8thLVZ67t9DsaOCZmlM7a9iNNsxxEBi5BJ3v6ON5Ik AvhkcdbiIXcfg== Received: from null (appsuite-gw2.open-xchange.com [192.168.110.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA256 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by open-xchange.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2ECF13C20AF; Thu, 8 Feb 2018 15:03:34 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2018 15:03:34 +0100 (CET) From: Vittorio Bertola To: Niels ten Oever , hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <944996404.10570.1518098615205@appsuite.open-xchange.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20171111132647.GA5997@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_Part_10568_1989703484.1518098615170" X-Priority: 3 Importance: Medium X-Mailer: Open-Xchange Mailer v7.8.4-Rev22 X-Originating-Client: open-xchange-appsuite Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] About draft-tenoever-hrpc-association X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2018 14:03:38 -0000 ------=_Part_10568_1989703484.1518098615170 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Il 6 febbraio 2018 alle 2= 2.25 Niels ten Oever ha scritto:


Hi all,

Let's be precise: the DNS is not centralized (if it were, you= would
have to talk to ICANN each time you change an IP address).
I don't think the text says that the DNS is centralized, but = the current
hierarchical structuring does allow for a centralized venue = for policy
making vis a vis the DNS, right?

"a"? = "Centralized policy making on the management and operation of domain names" is also being done in a number of different and uncorrelated = places, either for each of the subtrees in the DNS hierarchy or for those n= odes that have certain feature. First of all this happens at the national l= awmaking level; also, each TLD defines their policies, and often second lev= el domain administrators define policies too. I'd say that the policy m= aking is as hierarchical as the system itself, or if you prefer centralized= at each of the layers of the hierarchy for anything existing in the nodes = below, rather than simply "centralized".

Also, "surve= illance of the services running on the domain, domain based censorship [RFC7754], or impersonation of the domain through DNS cache poisoning" are things = that could also happen if the DNS were flat rather than hierarchical.

All in all, I guess that what you were trying to say is that if you co= uld get a domain name without having to register it somewhere, just by publ= ishing the registration independently, no one could censor/influence you by= taking the domain down or by attaching conditions to the registration. Thi= s looks to me like blockchain hype: it's actually true for a part of th= e potential threats (but not, as I said, for some others), but, as of today= , no one has found yet a workable way to remove that last piece of centrali= zation (actually, even the current toy-scale blockchains are controlled by = an elite class of miners because they require so many resources that only r= elatively few people can afford to run the nodes, so I would not say that t= hey could solve this problem).

Moreover, the reason why the DNS is hi= erarchical is not because its authors wanted to introduce a central point o= f control, but exactly the opposite: the authors wanted to distribute contr= ol and management of the namespace so to make it less centralized and less = controllable (even if, possibly, for practical engineering reasons rather t= han for political and ethical ones). So it makes sense to point out the rem= aining risks, but perhaps one should also recognize the positive, liberal f= eatures of such a hierarchical model.

Ciao

--

Vittorio Bertola
Head of P= olicy & Innovation

<= /tr>=
Cell:+39 348 7015022
Skype:in-skype-ox@bertola.eu
Email:vittorio.bertola@open-xchange.com
<= td colspan=3D"2" style=3D"padding: 2px; font-family: verdana, sans-serif; f= ont-size: 8pt;">
Twitter: @openexchange - Facebook: OpenXchange - Web: www.open-xchange.com
Open= -Xchange AG, Rollnerstr. 14, 90408 Nuremberg, District Court Nuremberg HRB = 24738
Managing Board: Rafael Laguna de la Vera, Carsten Dirks, Michael K= napstein, Stephan Martin
Chairman of the Board: Richard Seibt

Eu= ropean Office:
Open-Xchange GmbH, Olper Huette 5f, D-57462 Olpe, German= y, District Court Siegen, HRB 8718
Managing Director: Frank Hoberg
<= br>US Office:
Open-Xchange. Inc., 530 Lytton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 9430= 1, USA

Confidentiality Warning: This message and any attachments ar= e intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s), are confidential,= and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are here= by notified that any review, retransmission, conversion to hard copy, copyi= ng, circulation or other use of this message and any attachments is strictl= y prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the send= er immediately by return e-mail, and delete this message and any attachment= s from your system.
=20 ------=_Part_10568_1989703484.1518098615170 Content-Type: image/png; name=image1.png Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <5be0f06900124bc5ac3f7591a0d1911f> Content-Disposition: inline; filename=image1.png iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAAL4AAAAoCAYAAABAS0DDAAAABmJLR0QA/wD/AP+gvaeTAAAACXBI WXMAAAsTAAALEwEAmpwYAAAAB3RJTUUH3wQeDywT3CnvewAAFz1JREFUeNrtnHl0VEW+x7+/qnu7 s7IjDIiyJd0dXGaeM0fBUZAlSacbHZcnvnEUXFC2JJ2g5+mZcXT2eaNmI4RNR50RfTPuQzobCCI6 oL73xmWg050EwiZbEtmydPe99Xt/dCfgMpIOi3hOf8/hJGnq1q2u+6lf/X6/qltAXHGdJFtWbs/v DlfBaddnz/H07bozcu98AEC6M0/PmFk46Jo7Hh1qd3n6pWUuAsUf9Tcjh9sDX2VJz99jrp3dz5Lc 7wIhNStAfC7awMxsGsHjx/Zu27f/n28Z3Z+nZy9AoKaiG/5UkBgVY9UC4KNHdu3e/enHL7EtJw/+ qrKY25c+/T6S1qRRIJkSw2UEgMG82+ctOmbPWpQIXf93Yp5JQoSV4oMM9bQWR/AbsKrOXPgqSzBm xu1C14f8QEpxN0OkE/MQEFm6uYw+xLMmIlJST2gfOOaKtgGjv/cmm8bz/uole7uhBwCllBCa8ACY DiDUe/DpaP9RF/7y04/xt1ihtznz4K8ug7AkOkHiURAGRPujN0oG06sUVP8JAND0G0HUykodVkpt E0LWg1EYt/jfAPT+6iVIm3H/QM2aXAyi/wCgn23Ie6EwgEPM6rGOzuPP7HpzVc8MYMvOGyx0/XUA P4yxzt1Q6l6ft7iuG+ZT9k90drA586YJqf0JRCNivGcNmGb7Kp84CAB2t+c+IWWtMsynSIigyZgn WP1WxFE8t/JXL4HNuciuJaR8AKLZACznAfSIDr4RRGJlUmLqY2mZuYk91remrNXo7HQCeCvGOkdB iGV2l+daUwUpMohy/yXwACLQ5+RNF1JbHSP0CsB6ocRcX+UTBy+f9Yvuee24aRg2AAGl1BIBlQHA lHEUz63sLs8YIbWXAXKcr20komuFpPCAi7+7qaF2Kduy8xCoKw8NTZ9YA6IJANJiqG4gkbhGkPZJ S8OW5tbG92HLXoTWxvc/V6i14b1o/+TnCKGtANHI2Nw9tUEZxr2+quJdGe4H8M/XfgsAuMA2qRmM a0EAAWEQXQMSz8TBP0can7UAIyZM0Rj4A4ic532DiX4ghfZJS8MWf2vje3C4CuDzFrcPTZ+4EUSO GOEfRERThqZdFWhp2NLwRehtzjy0Nr4He06+k4QsA9HYkwLVXkTpqoqh7vZXle2yuzzweYsAAJfc 9DC2vvF4aIjt6gAxH1BG+LDQtE31lUX/jIN/jtTW9AH6j/23S4XUlgL4NvS7BUTDBqddWdXasKUj edBgHNnbgJbA5qND066qAdFlAMbHUN8AEE0eknbl1paGLU3pWfPR2vQ/sGXnwl+zpNunfwpEY2JL TalqVmpOvbd0v93tQb03kim7fNYv8MnLv8Ilt/wc217/failYcuB1qYPPm0JbG7r/YiK67Q09prZ 2L7pOdhcBU8LIe4+RfF2ZvUhmM2z1yJmErI/QN89RcEWVsbN9d7St7s/iFp+OLI9/aCJ50E0M8ab 72HTuK2+qvTdE8Fz7nTS9OeJxDCAY3BveKMyQ7f5q8r3xzyhxbE8h/79zMXbCTiVRTtgGqFbYYT8 ID4ryQelwu1CT/mZ1CwPnqJoJ1j9XJnhEn91eU+Wx5FTAF9VMRw5nuEQohxEN8fYhE/ZNGfXV5Ws s+fk5VDEp78wti/B6xUHf+KvWrrP7spHvbc0psvjefxzpDGT7xxOoNRTp6OJhWY5Xl+95MDZbE96 9iLVi2JWBo0mqWsAesCPQg9fVcl+h6vAA4BBdEsMwegIkvJ5u8vzBJGYGzP0rF41w13zAnXLDvUF egCIpzPPlZgHgFVv+pvO0UxMveQjCeAvlfVVRXxpn7d4D5RaAOCvMbZ7GAn5SxClx9iPr5mhzvsD dcsOXX7rL/oEfRz8c8k91LfVrRRfB7TDVQBfVckhYp4P4KUY606MEfqNZrB9bqBuecvI7znx0V8f Pa0vFVdcfZbPW4wMdyG2VRa1EbMHwCtnacbcEOo6dktg7YpWANj7j+rTHs1xxXVa2lZZ1P3zU2b2 MPMbZxZ69YoZ6ri1ad2qFgAYO2XOGZnG4orrtJXhLgQA1FcW7ekyjXsYXH1moOc3TCM4L1C3PAL9 5NnY/tazcfDjOr+s/picPDRXl7V2hYz/YKDutMIi8NvKDN0XqKloGXpZJgBg+8bnzljgEldcZ0w7 qsow1pmP5tqyI4YZvgvMm/rI/f+Yoc4f+6vLD9pz8nDo47oz2s44+HGdcVkpsjwkFGcAGIje76U/ WUmkWTMAoL4PL7HEwY/rnMqRsxi+qifhyFk8VWqWZ0F0Cfq0LkEThJArbTn50wAgPWvR2QF/fOa9 /7LQoIwffmMd+Xv+amNhdxfEKTuPZM+JBLdR6KdBYDUII0+z2tFCyuW2nPyrD71fAwBIy1pw5sC3 uTxorHsKAGDLyU+yuwv72V2elIun3KEBQNu2d2DLzsXFE2870aKrbz8HnZmPh4iilsSTbHcX9Le7 8lIi2YPiOG3nkeqrirotfhYEVoEwvI8uzhct/3gh5TMXTHRNAYCG2gqMz5x/2rVqNlcB/N5ijHcu supCzwHRzSAaCRIdiSmDP7TneP5ifNbyMctU7Ny8BADooqtu4+Z3V59d6F2RLaY2Z+5wktqNIDEd rIZAaG2OmQVeI9T5YkPt8vbRV96E5vdejZP3DSrd5UHAWwKbq3AGCEtAPRvxztBqNaUJKf9oc+Uv 8HtLaxrrlp2+xfd7i5E2Y56uSf1RCPlXABcws48ZR4jkXSBxU+Pm5xHw/ha2bI/D5sxdkDjwAnF2 oS9AvbcEdlf+ZULqlUTiF2AOA/gIgA4SFZolaSUAFG95JU7eeQB9ustzHQk8DYrpBZVY4B8jhFxu y8mbCgDjps89PYsPANKaeCWRWARwxfbqpQVBM6giroYng5XZ1jNKNPk7QAR9lUVLbdkLBMDKXxMZ fTbnIklCaMo0jUDNUtPhLiCYBoWDXawnJAqlwkoZBjesW4UxU+dgx/pn4cheKKBbRbBln7F984sn pk1vMew5nvEk5CsATGUat/irTuwJt7sLHyGiXzpcnvU3Ej0NALasRULTrNjqfVKNnzFPaLpFM4yQ 0Vi3XNndBZ9zjWyZC4k0oSsAQsGor1miHO7FEBrBDAVJKaZATbkaN/lO0lMG6qxM1b0t1+ZcBH91 eZz4qKLQTxVCvECgYej9Dk0GsBvAhb1PstDFQmrPpjtzbw1UL9kCAOOuuwtNG57pm49PBBuBUjs+ 2/+boBlUYyfPjvptJdvqq8v2292Fl9rdBb8CIYfBAx3XL36UpD6ZVWS/uN2VP0pIPY9IVgjN4klz 5g0B4YcQ2hTTCPaHkLeTsKSRZgUA7Fj/bHTYWX7CwK0nQx+J4BdaSYifARgMZczphj4tMxLYGEdb iwH4mGTPLiWh67NMNq6wu/IGadbEXBKyTLMkzLG7C1LqK4uRFvUL7dm5ScJivYWEViyEVkaadnOG +8FkX+WTICYCiSuElNMczvwheurgOURiKUn9pw534WgAfYaehM7f0rcf+Kt89YxocsHuLswWQjwT I/QAeKMKh25gVjH6qTRKapaX7c6I5W/a8AzGTpndN/CZEWIwEvoNvgIAxk36EUZNnBUJVtweHazG EsS1AOsE2gXm4QB0SkhSdmdeOgmtEkRzABwn0ERNaqVgKgLRJD0hSYDoEZCYQqTR+BnzozNE7kSQ XMashkXacKJvSdMmgOhGMK/0eUu3AMDFE29GQ10Fsn+zGY1vP3cczDuEoFEAMGbK7FSQ+DmAWSQs xQT6LohSiWQRQAXjZi7SGuqWYWjalZI0vRREv2dABygZJFYqNm8GgPajLTpI3A6SD0DKYgAuAJ1E 4h4GHre7Pal9pcc0QocJpHr7dM8B0L2xsgrA8c89nCj02yqLkeEuyCKiZQS6KKZ2M79uhoO3+WuW fKjCwcXM6rWTBllvNJI0/Xl7Tv4NALD9ref69uWVUu8ACAipP+Vwe36y9nc3Yvfmv8CWkwdr8qBw vbfkDbB6nxmthtH5n0qZuQDe9P+tCKTpL4FZKNP4MZvmA8w8D0AygEuZlV9YEg0AYRI0hCRR49pl UQtt+SmzOuCvLCkGgIRo9sbuytVIiMlgbmdl1kTcmIXYuTniy29ZcV9324MAkDr2ikQ9ecB4AINI ajeD1TuKzft9a4puZ/AaIsyxmHIYAAyxXf1rEN3EysxXysxjpeaxUtsBnjhu8l26JTF1IEDfI9BE Bj42g+13+SqL85nVSjA7WfGAvlK2650X9jNwvBdFwwzVfg7AP9SLMkECNzObxgnoPd3QT2MSqwGM jm3+4DUqHLo/ULP0AAAEait2maGu+azUKzEO+O+Q1FbYnbkzAGDsD2PLMmoAEKgq3WFzeWYJIV8C yecc7sIsxebDfm/pHgBIz17QH4ImgPldKSzt9d5SI5puvBPAZcx8m7+qbGvUkh8hqe0A6BCb5laS QgHaPmZzuDIiZ6s4XAVuMGUpM5gZ8dPuRdOGp6IdIyWYLgXQahqhrQDgr13a0+DDuz6JDlkxACA+ tv1/O0dmTLkEwCBmfrW+smhVhntx1PzQVhDNYFKWdGfeGBDdA1Z/qveWVNrd+boyzEFCt0xg5hea Nj4TtrsLBgO4HIQ3ibG0Ye3KjqgZU0x0lEDGafkMrN4kEvecotQQQbIm44YHzuoLKazUqWcfouPK NN/3V5147XBbZQky3J5MJvEygFhnwL+bRvDuQO3SltE/mInmD9YgLXM+GuqWHUifMW++sCYSkbgp hvqGkWZ5wZa1wO2vrXgPAEZfezua3z51xlGkOyMrYn5vyYehziOXM/OjILpeCO3P9hzPCAAQUh8K IAPMm+qrSrt6rpZaAYCdOzeufjmyBpAHCBATUpiw/+jeQBNAJsDNkcOBKNnuLkiEEAtYqRoVNN+a cNNDJ6CPzK6SCKkADu//R3XLtMc2fKnRF33/hiQwD1XK2BW9ZgKAzmDXkUcibkWwm7QkMCsAHULK WSAaaoZDbfacvHlEcqXULZ+A4YVSL0SqMYcR0QBm9ZSvsqgjMugXpoDoUgAfM3P76cFmlnfPVF+j BDBfxIpHseILz9Y/nHBPvq7BH4Foa3QdBVGj5WKSf44den7LDHXdEKhZ2sLMaP5gDQCgoW4Z0jPn I7B2+SEVDuYzq1i3NA8RlkSvLXvRNABofns1xky+49TgB6rLkTZjHgCgad1THUbbod8w8wNg/gEI 10dKySEMGs7MH3VfmHzxBAuB0sH8v53HD5ppmfPhryoDQfYn0BgwAgPHXW6awc4wwE0ADZd6ghXM kwBMAtTjjeuXcfDYZ1+KpEBEANSxQ828++9//VKjk4eNvQrAWAAvR01TOjO/u2Pd0y3js+bDX1OO lKSBBGAcwG3HDjYfIxIZYA5qlsTpJLQcVqqFmecqs/Pu+qqSfdEp4vsAdoI50NNBpPcH0yXM5vt7 9u482ue0n3MRhNQ+AfMfvyVBbQczlvi9pW0TZj4IX1UJHK4CJ4RYAeCCGKe611U4dGugdmmLu+hD jJ/2+V0CgWhePlBbsUeFQ7nM7I2xrYOFbl1tz8m7AQB2bPxz73x8oUfOKbVl56Hx739mVqH3QHQU wPAojWlgPkgkel6AHmmfPBJgqZTRAAAk9WhRupQZEwn8fyoUVA3rVhhQajsBgzqO7DNIyN+AeW24 s30zADSuXfGF7IdQrLgLwGBb9sILAictVoy99g7Yrpungeh6ECWF248+YXd5RhCQDvAnAEDhyKkc I6+bbQdhKhgbDErrAtAfQBODf6RM49Zw59GH6yuLXvVXVxwBALtzoRUkJwPYZnR27jvhDMp+THwR EW1t/+j1L2Sfer98Hqguh29NkanM8H8B+Pj8z+VwUX1l0d8AYOuax+FwFUyDEKuBGLchMFcp07jf X1N+CAB8a8rQtP7pLxXrNr6B2qW7jc5js5nV2hhbPIykVpHuXDQdAMZNvftUrk6epfs0W39NGWyZ C6Qg/TIwJwDUnHb1bUSAI5JzVT05fTaVAYCJRELkwZYhPSdvMBEVEpFipT40jh2NROlSfsZAZ0K/ 4XcBGA2lyprWrwp/ZT+FzTAxbwLRONKsnz+2QkpBidbrQJTPplnStOHp/QANQeRgIysANKxfGbXU 4t8BGsxKvXrg/ccVMR9j8MVsGqa/uqyraf0fDQAYP32uBgCKRAIRXU0MX+P6FccBIG36fIIy08E4 DNBeAHDMXKzZXQVDbM5ca6C2IqYnY8vJg796yU5lmncCaD5PkTeZudxXWfTIhOsf7HZvpkOIVxDZ aRmTT6/YvNdfXXZwyLhJEa9iw1dPeA1rlwMAxk+bi8Y3V7WGjn92KzOvjzHVOUJqlmfTsxde2bQ+ cp/x/2KhSxNSPmF3FWxkVocIIJC4BEI8COAfMILVlDpUMrNJJIYy6DKHq+A7wWNtWxvWLd/tuH7x ThLyJntO/gsgmUiC7gFjHDM3Q8o9jZue4WiqshXAYUH0EJhrfFUlm6IdCp/383tu/LVLTJsr/1UB cQuBHre7C/oD+DtAOlhNIqE9BvA6VuFfRUfgCAjNQkyZDndhJit1iITIBNFPwfyk6ji0KepCVRHo Fhbi13Z3wWowQECaYlMCeI5NYxSkdYDisK9nnFkSBBF9H8BBVmrv6KvuBJTKIqLXQGIugJjyaP6q suiqdPFHtqzcScKiPwlQdh+AOlvyg1FhOdZeDgDDvxOE6S7IAclVAPePsa53lDJ+7PeW7vviAuLX qfHNVRg39W40rf/j4fTM+XOkJfFZEE2NAf6RUre+ZHPmzvZXL9nQuG4Vxlw9Czve/cvnwSeidCa6 R5DoBIMANpnVKwQuSRw29sDRI35IQ38NQI4Q8mlmHGJl5ADoMEOhO6VueVFIfR2zCjB4BRvBF0Hi PkAcPmHGzQMk9AQwpygz/PPuj78IfU/ve0sP2V35c4jEQ0T0IEASgGSINmb1iGBe6a8ubwMAJjGJ gM0MriCIpSS1FLAKM6tHSNHywFurDQA42uz/736j01OJ6GcEMYuJw8zqgID2h2hYcTmrcCOb6v8i bt9CMIcJJo0AaKsywwct/VMEE19CQuonr2jHouiqNKJxxY/t7oJrAGQCNAXgNAIlx5jTPh0pBloJ +JCZqyH4nfrKkvru/9yzC9cISX8Aq0HoXSqWosH7awz1mN9buicW6LvVba0Ddct227Nz74Km/YpA 7uis3pt+uYCkvio9a8E9gdqKjV+EHgDI7i5IIiETwu2f6XpSfxOAoQyjw19dFsq4/kGk3fQQGl/9 L6HYTGZlJJDQzc62vYeb330xsq3Bvbi/EEKHMoyuwweO6CkDJEAJDOoAoAI15bC7PBNIyvVsqj/U e4ufjAR7eQh8xXnpNlch/NFDP+3OPJ2klqyMoE5SY0CEjHCwvbGuwrTf+DDqX/sd7O7CtwA0dh49 vCCp38AkEkJXygizET7mryk3Ha5CKDMcOZ8xc4EU1oQUFQpaSbcoAEGEVEd9XamZnjUvgYS0KpOP k6aZgaoy2LIXUnRNgpURbtdTB6Gr7dN+Qk9IlZbE/f6q0j4f8zfm2juw4+1IEJaWvVCTmiUBzBqR OJfvSDCDFRSHOvf4unZ+XMvR9DUCNRWwOfOsQmrJMdfJ3FHvLQ72BfqeeG7yndi+8U/R1eH8BIJM jCW9ywCxETzur1kaPK0eGnDxZb0uO/qkwMKWnZfgcBcWOdyF2xyugu9E/K77z8hTu/D7PyL7zMIu x/WLz8jm/PTsRSe1e+HnfgLAsAlTv/L3uL59OisLJONnzNUIYjSTTNStCdMAehisHvRVFv/pq/z6 vmrs1Hvs1uQBPmUaP/JXlb4Rf5xx9VZn5exMM2RYrMmpP9F0q8tUysqsishQL3+dX98XJab0u5JI bFWKffFHGdc3Dv6OjWs6L73hjlUDB6TWHv6sbU+7ofY11ZQZZ/o+wwf1fxtS+6ir49h2f/xZxhWD /h8GmoXifjFrZgAAAABJRU5ErkJggg== ------=_Part_10568_1989703484.1518098615170-- From nobody Fri Feb 9 07:59:26 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF03E129BBF for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2018 07:59:25 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vvKrLkiMc-Op for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2018 07:59:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.nic.fr (mx4.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:2::4:12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 24DE31200FC for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2018 07:59:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 17A16280181; Fri, 9 Feb 2018 16:59:21 +0100 (CET) Received: by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 500) id 11B90280B69; Fri, 9 Feb 2018 16:59:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from relay01.prive.nic.fr (relay01.prive.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:15::11]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B3F6280181; Fri, 9 Feb 2018 16:59:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from b12.nic.fr (b12.tech.ipv6.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:1348:7::86:133]) by relay01.prive.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08189642A7A1; Fri, 9 Feb 2018 16:59:21 +0100 (CET) Received: by b12.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 1000) id EF0EB40697; Fri, 9 Feb 2018 16:59:20 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2018 16:59:20 +0100 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Mallory Knodel Cc: hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <20180209155920.ei7wwo3jkkvuniny@nic.fr> References: <3b36b025-d6b5-6abb-323a-dbd6c61ba914@acm.org> <20180130110106.vxa7sygorvrhndag@nic.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 9.3 X-Kernel: Linux 4.9.0-5-amd64 x86_64 X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie Organization: NIC France X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/ User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000002, version=1.2.2 X-PMX-Version: 6.0.0.2142326, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2018.2.9.154816 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Anonymity, Human Rights and Internet Protocols X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2018 15:59:26 -0000 On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 09:34:45AM +0300, Mallory Knodel wrote a message of 45 lines which said: > I would like to help with: > > * More reasons why anonymity is necessary. > * Which leads to more use cases. Version -02 has just been posted. Text welcome. From nobody Mon Feb 12 11:11:13 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BF23126C0F for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 11:11:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.165 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.165 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3NyoaDw8aOAS for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 11:11:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtprelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0078.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.78]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A2D04126DCA for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 11:11:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (clb03-v110.bra.tucows.net [216.40.38.60]) by smtprelay08.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA779182CF668 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 19:11:09 +0000 (UTC) X-Session-Marker: 6176726940646F7269612E6F7267 X-Spam-Summary: 2, 0, 0, , d41d8cd98f00b204, avri@acm.org, :, RULES_HIT:41:152:355:379:854:973:988:989:1260:1261:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1381:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1539:1593:1594:1711:1730:1747:1777:1792:2198:2199:2393:2559:2562:2689:2895:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3352:3865:3866:3867:3868:3870:3872:4184:4250:4362:5007:6117:7652:7875:7903:10004:10400:10848:11232:11658:11914:12050:12663:13069:13071:13311:13357:13894:14180:14877:21060:21080:21324:21627:21740:30054, 0, RBL:none, CacheIP:none, Bayesian:0.5, 0.5, 0.5, Netcheck:none, DomainCache:0, MSF:not bulk, SPF:, MSBL:0, DNSBL:none, Custom_rules:0:0:0, LFtime:2, LUA_SUMMARY:none X-HE-Tag: death48_6167d498e9a07 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 1502 Received: from [192.168.0.7] (ip72-221-122-28.ri.ri.cox.net [72.221.122.28]) (Authenticated sender: avri@doria.org) by omf06.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 19:11:09 +0000 (UTC) Reply-To: avri@acm.org To: hrpc@irtf.org From: avri doria Message-ID: Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:11:06 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 180212-2, 02/12/2018), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Archived-At: Subject: [hrpc] Drafts and IETF 101 session X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 19:11:12 -0000 Hi, I am working on the summary of the comments on the RG drafts and should have it in a day or so. So anyone who wants to get a comment in still has time. With the IETF RG meeting coming up in a month or so, would like to find out who has something they want to discuss or otherwise see on the agenda. >From my last request: > Also time to collect ideas for the upcoming HRPC meeting.  > > In addition to the continuing discussion of what next, what else would > people like to see? > > - Who has something they want to speak about - a draft or some other paper > > - Do we want to invite a speaker. > > - Also plan to include discussion of updated drafts and any new drafts. > Which should we expect? Thanks avri From nobody Mon Feb 12 12:13:23 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18F8112D88A for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 12:13:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.435 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.435 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS=3.335] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QrleyjAOnZk1 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 12:13:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from ayla.bortzmeyer.org (ayla.bortzmeyer.org [IPv6:2001:4b98:dc0:41:216:3eff:fe27:3d3f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A21AB12D961 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 12:13:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by ayla.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id 70B1AA2770; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 21:13:06 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail.sources.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4EC161908BF; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 21:09:34 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 21:09:34 +0100 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Niels ten Oever Cc: Mallory Knodel , hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <20180212200934.ouaxeh2f5u3glrkt@sources.org> References: <20180118094058.xf6amdl3saumvrjr@sources.org> <20180123093625.GF913@mir> <20180124105314.GD4995@mir> <20180124172059.GA13067@mx4.yitter.info> <20180130142731.r4avtmbq33vcs7mf@nic.fr> <20180206130526.GH26829@mir> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180206130526.GH26829@mir> X-Transport: UUCP rules X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 9.3 X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Archived-At: Subject: [hrpc] Human Rights informal review team (Was: About draft-harkins-tls-dragonfly X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 20:13:12 -0000 On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 02:05:26PM +0100, Niels ten Oever wrote a message of 106 lines which said: > Do you have an architecture in mind, or do you want to have a call > or a seperate thread on how we best can set this up? I was thinking of something simple: * a Wiki (or similar) page to coordinate reviews, such as * a mailing list to discuss the reviews (but it does not have to be hosted at IETF right now) I will talk with the IRTF chair how to achieve these objectives. The only thing I miss is how to be told automatically of a WGLC? May be we can limit ourselves to IETF-wide Last Calls (announced on ietf-announce) but some interesting drafts are not discussed there (such as the one on Dragonfly). I will see how Genart does. From nobody Mon Feb 12 12:33:10 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB5BC12D959 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 12:33:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.435 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.435 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS=3.335] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Mg6GH40HkzzM for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 12:33:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from ayla.bortzmeyer.org (ayla.bortzmeyer.org [IPv6:2001:4b98:dc0:41:216:3eff:fe27:3d3f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 876F012702E for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 12:33:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by ayla.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id 382F2A2770; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 21:33:06 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail.sources.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 054391908BF; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 21:32:03 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 21:32:03 +0100 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Shivan Cc: Hrpc Message-ID: <20180212203203.si3eoidsff7rkcjb@sources.org> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Transport: UUCP rules X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 9.3 X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Thoughts on MLS Internet Draft? X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 20:33:09 -0000 On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 12:00:10PM -0500, Shivan wrote a message of 61 lines which said: > Wondering if anyone had any thoughts on the early draft of MLS (Messaging > Layer Security) protocol: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-barnes-mls-protocol/ The goal is important (secure *group* communications), I cannot really say something intelligent about the protocol, but it is certainly something to encourage. The security considerations mentions only *technical* security issues. But group communications have a big non-technical issue when it comes to confidentiality: *one* rogue or careless member of the group is enough to compromise all the group conversations. The draft mentions that the protocol scales to "thousands of participants". But it is unrealistic to hope you can keep something secret when it is shared by thousands of people. From nobody Mon Feb 12 12:53:29 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4830412D959 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 12:53:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z01PkbfDdlyn for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 12:53:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from ayla.bortzmeyer.org (ayla.bortzmeyer.org [92.243.4.211]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 806DB12D964 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 12:53:09 -0800 (PST) Received: by ayla.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id 8658DA2770; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 21:53:06 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail.sources.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 9F3011908BF; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 21:51:46 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 21:51:46 +0100 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Vittorio Bertola Cc: Niels ten Oever , hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <20180212205146.kaeexl5ul3f6zmlh@sources.org> References: <20171111132647.GA5997@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <944996404.10570.1518098615205@appsuite.open-xchange.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <944996404.10570.1518098615205@appsuite.open-xchange.com> X-Transport: UUCP rules X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 9.3 X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] About draft-tenoever-hrpc-association X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 20:53:27 -0000 On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 03:03:34PM +0100, Vittorio Bertola wrote a message of 223 lines which said: > (actually, even the current toy-scale blockchains are controlled > by an elite class of miners because they require so many > resources that only relatively few people can afford to run the > nodes, so I would not say that they could solve this problem). A real analysis of the blockchains require more than one paragraph. For instance, the blockchain is not "controlled" by the miners because everything is public (that's the point) and collusion between the miners to make false results would be detected (there are many nodes which are not miners, it is not so demanding). Also, Bitcoin is not the only blokchain. Bitcoun's proof-of-work depends on an algorithm that can be implemented in specially-built ASIC, so it is quite expensive to run a miner. Other blockchains have different algorithms, often ASIC-resistant. From nobody Mon Feb 12 13:03:12 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BF0812D95F for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 13:03:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.435 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.435 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS=3.335] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VyUH7z5Jh8JX for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 13:03:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from ayla.bortzmeyer.org (ayla.bortzmeyer.org [IPv6:2001:4b98:dc0:41:216:3eff:fe27:3d3f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E44812D959 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 13:03:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by ayla.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id 4EAEEA2770; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 22:03:06 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail.sources.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2D0231908BF; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 21:58:24 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 21:58:24 +0100 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: avri doria Cc: hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <20180212205823.zgj77qfcpndpyiau@sources.org> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Transport: UUCP rules X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 9.3 X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Drafts and IETF 101 session X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 21:03:10 -0000 On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 02:11:06PM -0500, avri doria wrote a message of 15 lines which said: > With the IETF RG meeting coming up in a month or so, would like to > find out who has something they want to discuss or otherwise see on > the agenda. I would like a discussion on draft-tenoever-hrpc-anonymity-02. What do people feel about it? Also, a short information point on the Review Team (which may be up when we'll meet in London). From nobody Mon Feb 12 13:21:18 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DB8C12D962 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 13:21:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.587 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.587 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=0.723, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=open-xchange.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9mtlM_7m0zFV for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 13:21:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.open-xchange.com (alcatraz.open-xchange.com [87.191.39.187]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BCBF812D959 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 13:21:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from open-xchange.com (imap.open-xchange.com [10.20.30.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx4.open-xchange.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B010C6A588; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 22:21:03 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=open-xchange.com; s=201705; t=1518470463; bh=f8n3JkjswW1FkIat6C/QfwgnnKejH81ZdK2F9rBlj40=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From; b=zvdQa2BvkRCv6++YTkuA6yWAOrSHryjxU4Ythg9DNBW8RRkpGwEfq6ODs1/NtuocG /NrYmtaNSgDqpF0tsOgdUNz3XkvYbYxATyIEZd2AHTiv5/9vpTHwl7Ube0TjYzwNJ3 dY227jLWcxljqmNwFc5cPH2ghHW1yMGV2zL2MtJ8nRR9UWDGyXvIBh6kpfU7j0lnCl IBBxfOegxnw4Xhi0SCg5karPKpgXCV0ETkG6KSxGRmSgeEtrFyryPPykRaEaahaD7a Nm88GHzpO6NkYEDiDo83Eu/5Or3Ddz8cjGT89+eTff4hNbZL2EhQDW5MFrLGKMGzo3 4YINfiIXtIyMg== Received: from null (appsuite-gw2.open-xchange.com [192.168.110.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA256 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by open-xchange.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5BC923C01F2; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 22:21:03 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 22:21:03 +0100 (CET) From: Vittorio Bertola To: Stephane Bortzmeyer Cc: Niels ten Oever , hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <2096844716.521.1518470464142@appsuite.open-xchange.com> In-Reply-To: <20180212205146.kaeexl5ul3f6zmlh@sources.org> References: <20171111132647.GA5997@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <944996404.10570.1518098615205@appsuite.open-xchange.com> <20180212205146.kaeexl5ul3f6zmlh@sources.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 Importance: Medium X-Mailer: Open-Xchange Mailer v7.8.4-Rev22 X-Originating-Client: open-xchange-appsuite Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] About draft-tenoever-hrpc-association X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 21:21:07 -0000


Il 12 febbraio 2018 alle = 21.51 Stephane Bortzmeyer ha scritto:


On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 03= :03:34PM +0100,
Vittorio Bertola wrote
a message of 223 lines whic= h said:
(actually, even the current toy-scale bloc= kchains are controlled
by an elite class of miners because they require= so many
resources that only relatively few people can afford to run th= e
nodes, so I would not say that they could solve this problem).
A real analysis of the blockchains require more than one
parag= raph.

Agreed.

For instance, the blockchain is not "controlled" by theminer= s because everything is public (that's the point)

It is = controlled by the miners because if they organize and decide to stop mining= , the blockchain freezes and any service built on top of it becomes unavail= able to new transactions. Other people having enough resources could pick u= p the work from there, but then they would become a new potential point of = failure and so on. Of course, the more miners you have and the less likely = this is to happen, but still this architecture makes a distinction in power= s between the class of those who run a full node and the class of those who= cannot afford to do so, much like, in the DNS, one could argue that the cl= ass of those who run a root server is conceptually more powerful than the o= thers.

and collusionbetween the miners to = make false results would be detected

But still, since they a= re the only ones adding new blocks, if acting together, they would be able = to publicly alter/fork/takeover/whatever the blockchain.

(there aremany nodes which are not miners, it is not so demandin= g).

Also, Bitcoin is not the only blokchain. Bitcoun's proof-of-= work
depends on an algorithm that can be implemented in specially-built<= br>ASIC, so it is quite expensive to run a miner. Other blockchains havedifferent algorithms, often ASIC-resistant.

Yes, that's= why one paragraph is not enough :-) But my point was rather than some degr= ee of centralization is inherent in any directory system conceived up to no= w, including these fancy new ones, so we should not blame poor old DNS too = much.

Regards,

-- 

Vittorio Bertola | Head of Policy & Innovatio=
n, Open-Xchange
vit=
torio.bertola@open-xchange.com 
Office @ Via Treviso 12, 10144 Torin=
o, Italy
=20 From nobody Mon Feb 12 13:53:32 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5543126FDC for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 13:53:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.311 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.311 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cs.tcd.ie Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eg-KMR-doKQX for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 13:53:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A80C5126DC2 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 13:53:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD532BE4C; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 21:53:26 +0000 (GMT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qGGRXm9hwLpJ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 21:53:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [10.244.2.138] (95-45-153-252-dynamic.agg2.phb.bdt-fng.eircom.net [95.45.153.252]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 84B54BE2E; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 21:53:25 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1518472405; bh=ldk6wehXHU4z7JvPSv3eD3TKRepo823x1+rMKTOQeLo=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=m7Mh0u+i72PqygFgkRf3gqMn0cAQkmDSXdapucjTsSrsk+OR8YnvNPvXsGeXOEZho ug+73ea1fKOMhCPh2L0LzMxzWAzBbg7kortuCG3Bde6mDDlofG4hR+UcMtHW49hSXm fvwzHx2Q1Qk3hYqFTvt6zm/g/xfCB+3qUG8Sorgw= To: Stephane Bortzmeyer , Niels ten Oever Cc: Mallory Knodel , hrpc@irtf.org References: <20180118094058.xf6amdl3saumvrjr@sources.org> <20180123093625.GF913@mir> <20180124105314.GD4995@mir> <20180124172059.GA13067@mx4.yitter.info> <20180130142731.r4avtmbq33vcs7mf@nic.fr> <20180206130526.GH26829@mir> <20180212200934.ouaxeh2f5u3glrkt@sources.org> From: Stephen Farrell Openpgp: id=5BB5A6EA5765D2C5863CAE275AB2FAF17B172BEA; url= Message-ID: <22b3a536-b0a6-1ce6-bb23-b32efd84c25c@cs.tcd.ie> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 21:53:24 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180212200934.ouaxeh2f5u3glrkt@sources.org> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="vaRx27hizAirbGhKNw2Hs8P1WkhYvSLO2" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Human Rights informal review team (Was: About draft-harkins-tls-dragonfly X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 21:53:31 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --vaRx27hizAirbGhKNw2Hs8P1WkhYvSLO2 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Q4pfikLymmpWURWyqIYuGe5MstlBvCu2L"; protected-headers="v1" From: Stephen Farrell To: Stephane Bortzmeyer , Niels ten Oever Cc: Mallory Knodel , hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <22b3a536-b0a6-1ce6-bb23-b32efd84c25c@cs.tcd.ie> Subject: Re: [hrpc] Human Rights informal review team (Was: About draft-harkins-tls-dragonfly References: <20180118094058.xf6amdl3saumvrjr@sources.org> <20180123093625.GF913@mir> <20180124105314.GD4995@mir> <20180124172059.GA13067@mx4.yitter.info> <20180130142731.r4avtmbq33vcs7mf@nic.fr> <20180206130526.GH26829@mir> <20180212200934.ouaxeh2f5u3glrkt@sources.org> In-Reply-To: <20180212200934.ouaxeh2f5u3glrkt@sources.org> --Q4pfikLymmpWURWyqIYuGe5MstlBvCu2L Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------06DCEA43D57C2AE4F4641FC4" Content-Language: en-GB This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------06DCEA43D57C2AE4F4641FC4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hiya, On 12/02/18 20:09, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > The only thing I miss is how to be told automatically of a WGLC? May > be we can limit ourselves to IETF-wide Last Calls (announced on > ietf-announce) but some interesting drafts are not discussed there > (such as the one on Dragonfly). I will see how Genart does. secdir reviews are either by-request or triggered by IETF LC. I think genart's the same. It's not really tractable to catch WGLCs. (And in fact, WGLC isn't formally a part of IETF process, it's just almost always done.) So, "somebody asks/notices" or IETF LC are the real choices. That said, since this is very early days, I'd say just try it out and see how it goes for a while before doing anything even approaching formal. Cheers, S. --=20 PGP key change time for me. New-ID 7B172BEA; old-ID 805F8DA2 expires Jan 24 2018. NewWithOld sigs in keyservers. Sorry if that mucks something up;-) --------------06DCEA43D57C2AE4F4641FC4 Content-Type: application/pgp-keys; name="0x7B172BEA.asc" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="0x7B172BEA.asc" -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- mQINBFo9UDIBEADUH4ZPcUnX5WWRWO4kEkHea5Y5eEvZjSwe/YA+G0nrTuOU9nem CP5PMvmh5Cg8gBTyWyN4Z2+O25p9Tja5zUb+vPMWYvOtokRrp46yhFZOmiS5b6kT q0IqYzsEv5HI58S+QtaFq978CRa4xH9Gi9u4yzUmT03QNIGDXE37honcAM4MOEtE gvw4fVhVWJuyy3w//0F2tzKrEMjmL5VGuD/Q9+G/7abuXiYNNd9ZFjv4625AUWwy +pAh4EKzS1FE7BOZp9daMu9MUQmDqtZUbUv0Q+DnQAB/4tNncejJPz0p2z3MWCp5 iSwHiQvytYgatMp34a50l6CWqa13n6vY8VcPlIqOVz+7L+WiVfxLbeVqBwV+4uL9 to9zLF9IyUvl94lCxpscR2kgRgpM6A5LylRDkR6E0oudFnJgb097ZaNyuY1ETghV B5Uir1GCYChs8NUNumTHXiOkuzk+Gs4DAHx/a78YxBolKHi+esLH8r2k4LyM2lp5 FmBKjG7cGcpBGmWavACYEa7rwAadg4uBx9SHMV5i33vDXQUZcmW0vslQ2Is02NMK 7uB7E7HlVE1IM1zNkVTYYGkKreU8DVQu8qNOtPVE/CdaCJ/pbXoYeHz2B1Nvbl9t lyWxn5XiHzFPJleXc0ksb9SkJokAfwTSZzTxeQPER8la5lsEEPbU/cDTcwARAQAB tCFTdGVwaGVuIEZhcnJlbGwgPHN0ZXBoZW5AamVsbC5pZT6JAj0EEwEIACcFAlo9 UYwCGwMFCQmUJgAFCwkIBwIGFQgJCgsCBBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQWrL68XsXK+qG CxAApYHWYgGOIL3G6/OpkejdAkQoCVQAK8LJUSf6vzwost4iVfxIKcKW/3RqKNKk rRl8beJ7j1CWXAz9+VXAOsE9+zNxXIDgGA7HlvJnhffl+qwibVgiHgUcJFhCSbBr sjC+1uULaTU8zYEyET//GOGPLF+X+degkE/sesh4zcEAjF7fGPnlncdCCH3tvPZZ sdTcjwOCRVonKsDgQzBTCMz/RPBfEFX44HZx4g1UQAcCA4xlucY8QkJEyCrSNGpG nvGK8DcGSmnstl1/a9fnlhpdFxieX3oY2phJ1WKkYTn6Advrek3UP71CKxpgtPmk d3iUUz/VZa0Cv6YxQXskspRDVEvdCMYSQBtJPQ4y2+5UxVR9GIQXenwYp9AP2niv Voh+ITsDWWeWnnvYMq07rSDjq0nGdj41MJkNX+Yb2PXVyXItcj5ybE3T2+y3pSBG FEZYJGuaL4NwtBJFMOdOtBmUOPbetS2971EL3Izxb7ibOZWDwexv+8R6SWYfP1wV N3p46RyBQuXqJV8ccE11m6vtZTGSYgnLUUFZMRQYH+0hwuYe0T3AA18xDdSYsa8v ovCCd3l5S4UNzIM2PMChqGrEzKapUpZg7+8ACcxRU3b9Ihd7WYjJ+pQPCoWYKozv tEvenbNpE/govO/ED3B14e+R2yevRPjRrsN7PJzSf15fQLuJARwEEAEIAAYFAlo9 UqAACgkQLzyHNoBfjaLrSwf+MIHbFRQ4O5cmLYR5sIByWelN3SuRN/gW8rpKo9Ok Cz6An8uV/iCXy5tNMLzzi0BFl8f22DwBcC5qy9qnlIAdogWam1qWoTAoAD8veEqm uKhYrqJsCcAyNrKYmK0hP3rpHxx1LySDmKYXmw/8qtBXKHTouMm+5tSsznhykRMT AAr2p7PSaHgo+hIVaW/rKSspHjDhhZS+G9mtOZad1IH29M6G1Q1NCO0Ywe8krKLQ IAQlFxtgvOqpPOZNzeKBa/+KbE8TGgMWrkOhC8OeEM5PVzdDhlhD9kPzB/pCKDF5 DofJ/ZRqnDpbKPQ0bsW38AOig3kOc0A27awiBEw3urqR1bQyU3RlcGhlbiBGYXJy ZWxsICgyMDE3KSA8c3RlcGhlbi5mYXJyZWxsQGNzLnRjZC5pZT6JAkAEEwEIACoC GwMFCQmUJgAFCwkIBwIGFQgJCgsCBBYCAwECHgECF4AFAlo+o3cCGQEACgkQWrL6 8XsXK+qO0A//ZsfQzyXrZlu/eEV5jU620yeOM3P7SW3C3UQYdCgZ/TlvxGgKow5o DSXgjMiUyq9csGqbPBxlDYSxFZHNeDVKYIuP2ZK24tw5k6duTh4+sFwUualTMlcp 0zBCIzn3hRcsRvuPKHfl5+6oOi0+xqx3jX/s/69L/fvHmdSKet5LIUAxoYaZkTCr uFrPWb01tgAl5JExWkhmCY98iD+EeiIMAWBjMw1xV+p0uCwNbN6XDzcToK7wsm+t AIiWUy3DpP60a6WbVwdV0HNt2WZq5U5Jdh2k4S+sN2CnYk4tTW7jHjsWarV3FLIS COObADZuB7ljU4kYfdwZ+WzenXY4LGlxGQSlAblGjwZe4EIkCXAJUtzJhoFUuGaF /PlWjxqV3UFRcgTERZTijguVyREre8GNERNgvDxZvuXssEjvz9X5JfcIZDIJpdzh LiEIj9noUbfx1SzB5KDPQj0O7elMHa1671/rwWcpGr/MfVPTOik4H7F8rcVJelce ZTzC4tvya7M+jM4fyFWWt8Y4atTixUiP7U9o4uBZCQ0GzvsmFA4XLqn2pA5rVizM XnGbGOjufAP/efEJ4ul3qvjYe8ye8DXEDjKAxo/tuHYtk19XCi83QzFhWls5TT+X QeVTMEvVqo9Wek8yoxo67qvLKKqIcG9givQd8MxYNAbNYgSPtkbhZ8SJARwEEAEI AAYFAlo9UqAACgkQLzyHNoBfjaLzHAgAlWT6NXEGtw/r1miKNGcopzvzILQ9oB8r KI9U9EL6tOf/y2V5oYee/GyQDb3ZdoPxxYYcJf+RyiH1nMoqUIZiZJaf3bJXinDZ 5+AdfE++UR2NBvqaNyC6u3r24jo1B/sagKbYtWgsYtRqHLD4IWi37MZrVyjBuF7u 14Q07+uhjq6mX2O/tHpCYw/Q82tbeTRPyUf1WQOAfD1kfBpW9PvAva5Iw9FWeXpC XRzwxnCZhYfGfqtuSw6CPBYLdbikqML6FZ7EDuTBb/8um1wK7Y9bgeIQC+CYjhYB 5RXa1tDJRab2Js4luCvSR0w/CgHw26293tlve2Q6UTrmHxP5U22DlrQuU3RlcGhl biBGYXJyZWxsIDxzdGVwaGVuQHRvbGVyYW50bmV0d29ya3MuY29tPokCPQQTAQgA JwUCWj1RWgIbAwUJCZQmAAULCQgHAgYVCAkKCwIEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAAKCRBasvrx excr6jscEADEcB0WQEZn2AkrzDs1RhL0Lp6cZi0BigofkbcGfdhJyMSs19C0dhvn crAFClVI6/Udw3yFtDyYtOCf2W3M3A1K6/RfEizCLzTsdFIhni9gOJLlUpXViQtg rlstjk7hqVV3Ooz4BlCqS4cG7rfqf4LQQPpTAuFUEV9I28FBUB2irqC+v4gTysIg pMw0bA1yBU9sX5jE/tRkzqnuzZrkwiobDtRFJ9qp+7O2JtcY4EsVtLAsaodJKc5c F8R4OvB1n66vxxcgg9Eh4JNWZ47xsaCmAGo1Bcb2jIY35OtgAL7gCGLRSMKTtAaP y1/fEgIqhCljJ9x40Fkn/3r2BX21WC9HFSPFTBz2RluLRzxdgxOrkYK8EiHUPoE5 b1AEzZKw2AbeXfr57f5zYsN3IqfbQLUjMYtUN1wK3Pjb+idD972wyXMWt8uOzlI7 b9Ocu+nYm2whBfJv9Pmp3QYTmPz+LB9lH65VNVUSxSXVr5iWXO3qx1HtEiGEqkpo rMQCTh3T5Ud3PvMSRBFFKNs9WhJ/Lxz+SV30WLwG6dr5mQqlzAhb4Phc/zekZyXR dS/oDKrBLUucS36O//49JeyRi1QvOfxnfmIqRIAf/k3PoYJmTo5E82//r5Qj3YGl Ru78ba0HArxs+ACD6AnEHHcbswpbtVEKYzlSu0Ar0Dc7vRWM/IyQdIkBHAQQAQgA BgUCWj1SoAAKCRAvPIc2gF+NosIsB/9f/29FNla3BJfGIEIDnhrqGD0i9bSa89Sq Bd++uG06TQgW5wsqtNcrwn81yZTq6XE6i9VtD4GKfqC0d4KZJr9bnbeD81cI64VO dL8zJWJs0vj5EIXCobKyX74Kb4uePUyZqwT2Q74I116u/HwA9/FXsPo5isbh4ZqD 4t0VHpWkmfq1FPT9a/JPyX46qKqB2Fce/7Qy+SQP1NfkuUlbhUH/JG9aSSYvk3lz nNiH41x9M+FDlL106itXOubrl3oi2fT3fsSedq7uzt+IV0DQEeNaoQAUuwEhdB8I WOMqN2woDjGVKJftfsSWY9ilZrnDBNDrp0vRqcx33LUMkIw4d7iBuQINBFo9UDIB EAD6DdHQfMav8OXfhjTteoarOrlJTSdci727xiezGPuBHmpvceBRZgRasdbaMc4H Jee+R9+5x/nLPCuy/DxDyIjwIUeJNgc+l7LjI9WfpHTD8U4xxjvR5Mi7+ToQQUOU NuzT0O0pyuxP1uY3RehHEhOVfBZO59ipSeZL5iQC6T5MsK1SKfs51pLa5ToC1rc8 tBJ4zZmxRAyZiYc/AH2uZ/6rYjTTkAn1DVI9DYo2D/zE4bGjXdJW5pKphFB2lX3d G4I7ODi+5e1H6A/QpCu6z8/ZkIQ+9T1xcX/YwiFeA7PbTuW/eITbMbI1eV3+fyym 9aT7Rsflmp31Zxtr+sZwGGZf00ooMBFmqOS//NUQ/Vf3vDUew1h5QU1yDaWT3NAp vi+XWPH9TPy6TMfZA2FThHf11sX/gDBa5JWQZbptPEcmoazpiKZt91CrFPOaoXDP ck/Q61dfmr/oPikfByYnASIM3OwEuXqyQ9JDRfKrem5r+oA/wxWb5jELElAhOpny qMMvOh7uz1foUssL8MAv2TGXmxpVJ8Nu4je6wf96Z22fQ0D38zud+CKH3bMP3ayX XJBcdPoENrzFbWP5FTg/4TTDJ3vOAHZR5iCunYghx8b7Ffa4UbkwlD+dh8GiIAtv T51Ac0cO0Wc0Zjc57zPUz1zloMbf+zb1Bsn7DuEQoqj1gwARAQABiQIlBBgBCAAP BQJaPVAyAhsMBQkJlCYAAAoJEFqy+vF7FyvqrC8P/1tF6TeR83xD6MasqXyrBjwc LmziaF0Mlkj8k/YUiZ/knb53n97xQnh9yxPv0TT8Wpfdn3BmvqGyh8+ouHX9jMOx iRkMdNhIauVYY/8jmRfBSYWcFkfMzdYasvdLtmYJgx252HKTFdeOrszoOjWjEzwm h+tca3AFMu/nB++/KAmi5UJV7zsZ7uYJ5jm97LV5SLjNJIXXM+lHqCDrjDaDhNcz mq1LCRlU6/WDjvkuwaVhZG4lXxMDrvKnXMkjseQ2oKjwrIdfQM86H1z5J31lfhqo p+of0cimcIsBgSCPu+h96LHuAzeRBCbDKeqrfZtAZAGsokRina9947fRWxXHh3O6 6ILmXKNRxxWbDkPvYnQWUat8SbSTDoPWrDIGDRIAypqYo3pcN2OE0C1chqgDZQxk r+9kYZQpupOAN2TR+fM7JvbO9coKI8Uqog8CopoMeDQkd0YjcqlB1E0svODHTzcS oRzogDBYDqNLP7qVkNXpcOAXSVioBgiSDf7o5RdS/qmUyXBIeq6I5z8xBcd+BQ/n /9Frkm6K7IKP3ngUP4wEoiPx5ZE5+fPIScGmVUcZIMhkvMvem9XXh1yyhqN14gfj mLwPGdWbrgG8QUe0s2WeWIyss6uTiyF+ZbJSo2XOKVc3YFMVUUfgyudqAV1wWdZi nUk+H3pkqOKoHAy/8fST =3Dg8yx -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- --------------06DCEA43D57C2AE4F4641FC4-- --Q4pfikLymmpWURWyqIYuGe5MstlBvCu2L-- --vaRx27hizAirbGhKNw2Hs8P1WkhYvSLO2 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJaggzUAAoJEFqy+vF7Fyvqp28P+wbivriWryOAB8cYDQZAQZkd lAlvLqhN3WInzfnoyjHsFnF8MdQi5VP39CxRAVKA9f+4qhB2+J+WWW1juixovCuZ ceWL4vTlvBV2mBS00KRRkKMdLD0SFuSMTgPYktFPSVpyAmAsz+WLQILEvH3urwO4 KvG7iNkOA5SvamP9eopSvOApaSF+h2nBy3OB7mcEbUYAy4zPtJKjqVwFN226+nn2 oYEylU5QAKG1OaLb3h/exsMddBN8Ncq+h+dbjuP5MkK8X74oVdNWdPnKZ1UXA3Kf DjaOwCV1ZjVSKrS2rmetNW26nuznIHDu4PRp3nqwSzCbZ0OIBNrjHYQbcd4e4xH8 on90HqkfIlzeeYx+msxkZIJ9dbjFL5w+BX5kPHYG1Q1wLCITps328yGQcHpKp+Ny 4V42jMMbfoucTejDLdEGx/6aVhVXYWBOmey0NBfFXvt4bimo/CxAaLuOViA16zFl TIPED279WM3lu/ca9CLyS9mlEaY+Q/X3OlHwom7ODkrB3tt7ZCr1hAjWm0JfbDYu Ix/ZrUU2SfyEFYWoaVMFimHJxhxQwTNDzGsg4cZJbXcteHxNlrugPbmNBK2Jer3Y G3Inq+YOqzmJMNjg2mYw9lDWwSaV7/3Ad8pJ6fUFwaMjfywemFvZCs84VtopMrHD o5V/u7QBHC1jty0fShPB =eeA5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --vaRx27hizAirbGhKNw2Hs8P1WkhYvSLO2-- From nobody Mon Feb 12 14:07:50 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75B58126D74 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:07:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.449 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id h0aUbR7QXrt2 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:07:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lf0-x232.google.com (mail-lf0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 23C0512D9FE for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:07:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lf0-x232.google.com with SMTP id h78so15280908lfg.6 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:07:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=gefhiTwRGyvZd3dChfj9+KbaizMDnjNOLPZwS/5TeoY=; b=Y0yycJdUF/8VOwIdVxiaUL3rF/HgacAEzBQckv0fTCtfIXRVcndRy/Ntoj5iht5wR1 7WopW/0b7/p1tTyptnyla9vZjJs5gUtYOdm0nOERXVyJ9x37Q0/LAMOWUWZhGaXy6Wyn y7dkNScrnVk6w/Q75NcuGYJqNdGB8eU9wWDJ/m5UkMUvC+s4MgrKQy01tOq3kmGkag21 E4Zj7mWPdFyH7GzrRG+k1FoQ5etlqn7EvCAoP8L8XXIpDcG5GeX+vJ9d7ws9AA/iKEeW 9qSUjPs2CR20QysUJtlW02t7NV/aE5LrtUaRq/3QRtk1iwh/NlBjUPO4+mh6IZAVLpwh QMew== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=gefhiTwRGyvZd3dChfj9+KbaizMDnjNOLPZwS/5TeoY=; b=mdKWc6c+Y5xOf4F5pljkMqLbm5k/+sldA829PkprMkydmMrMbWhj6lXqJrT0vnIcWN T3jyIONjdXSVAyih2A49LKLZXz2ClO+ZRCXPd1Xnr9MJDSN4cc5+gxWzC6AX21P1K1HQ DcyGaOAh5t4DjQRhyYNPkjZ2nlzMuzPbJvobUKMi7OI1oWCbMEFCG/cW8/pJ/c8P44nU sLgwotN2YezEj0AzUswFS0ouOaOkbmsphg6n9rFB6ZsMOMfAqTwnqGQlwM9aJc6dbf6K aFHueXsq7RPATYaa1Hh9Wq416xThK98XaYLtFNMUPetKbP9PfoI3i+NCCaYNnklFKaV2 b+3A== X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPC2QGp+IcaeFKpiuIy89Bw1A6e8r+s0ZBDSnPUoC53Gzk0rvjHg emV+kZBqJpBA7HjvsJQkzG/C+Kc0/1IiKDvNSvw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x224hZQmOrvIVpLmPOUtOClO/7QZfJWXIRnu9rFYTIGRcZe1KBfHx19W0jSR72irpnIKgWTt1SLdhY+kKzR0VD04= X-Received: by 10.46.60.24 with SMTP id j24mr5548259lja.140.1518473238082; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:07:18 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.46.36.4 with HTTP; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:06:37 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20180212203203.si3eoidsff7rkcjb@sources.org> References: <20180212203203.si3eoidsff7rkcjb@sources.org> From: Shivan Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 17:06:37 -0500 Message-ID: To: Stephane Bortzmeyer Cc: Hrpc Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f4f5e807ede0f4f89005650b1976" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Thoughts on MLS Internet Draft? X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 22:07:47 -0000 --f4f5e807ede0f4f89005650b1976 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 3:32 PM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > > The security considerations mentions only *technical* security > issues. But group communications have a big non-technical issue when > it comes to confidentiality: *one* rogue or careless member of the > group is enough to compromise all the group conversations. The draft > mentions that the protocol scales to "thousands of participants". But > it is unrealistic to hope you can keep something secret when it is > shared by thousands of people. > =E2=80=8BThat =E2=80=8Bproblem is intractable though - if someone can see a= message, they can take a photo of it. --f4f5e807ede0f4f89005650b1976 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<= br>
On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 3:32 PM, Stephane Bor= tzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr> wrote:

The security considerations mentions only *technical* security
issues. But group communications have a big non-technical issue when
it comes to confidentiality: *one* rogue or careless member of the
group is enough to compromise all the group conversations. The draft
mentions that the protocol scales to "thousands of participants".= But
it is unrealistic to hope you can keep something secret when it is
shared by thousands of people.

=E2=80=8BThat =E2=80=8Bproblem is intractable though - if some= one can see a message, they can take a photo of it.

--f4f5e807ede0f4f89005650b1976-- From nobody Mon Feb 12 22:47:13 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3F96126C83 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 22:47:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.92 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.92 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id l6QjPQGNl1YB for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 22:47:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9D815126C26 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2018 22:47:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1elUMs-0004k1-UK for hrpc@irtf.org; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 07:47:07 +0100 To: hrpc@irtf.org References: <20180212205823.zgj77qfcpndpyiau@sources.org> From: Mallory Knodel Message-ID: <37a3f368-a45b-3783-437e-262a667a296f@article19.org> Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 09:47:03 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180212205823.zgj77qfcpndpyiau@sources.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Scan-Signature: 74b82c602e180a6a7275945acf229479 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Drafts and IETF 101 session X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 06:47:12 -0000 On 12/02/18 23:58, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 02:11:06PM -0500, > avri doria wrote > a message of 15 lines which said: > >> With the IETF RG meeting coming up in a month or so, would like to >> find out who has something they want to discuss or otherwise see on >> the agenda. > > I would like a discussion on draft-tenoever-hrpc-anonymity-02. What do > people feel about it? +1 -- Mallory Knodel Head of Digital :: article19.org gpg fingerprint :: E3EB 63E0 65A3 B240 BCD9 B071 0C32 A271 BD3C C780 From nobody Tue Feb 13 04:04:17 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDE3D12422F for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 04:04:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.92 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.92 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dY3LnUr3kn9o for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 04:04:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 76FB9120454 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 04:04:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1elZJh-0007PW-Rd for hrpc@irtf.org; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 13:04:10 +0100 To: hrpc@irtf.org References: <20180212203203.si3eoidsff7rkcjb@sources.org> From: Niels ten Oever Message-ID: Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 13:04:09 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180212203203.si3eoidsff7rkcjb@sources.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authenticated-As-Hash: f1842a279235a42f6aa2a2a81130733515c5a4ec X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Scan-Signature: 0ccaee305be983877c9e38c09cbf8ec4 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Thoughts on MLS Internet Draft? X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 12:04:16 -0000 On 02/12/2018 09:32 PM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 12:00:10PM -0500, > Shivan wrote > a message of 61 lines which said: > >> Wondering if anyone had any thoughts on the early draft of MLS (Messaging >> Layer Security) protocol: >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-barnes-mls-protocol/ > > The goal is important (secure *group* communications), I cannot really > say something intelligent about the protocol, but it is certainly > something to encourage. > > The security considerations mentions only *technical* security > issues. But group communications have a big non-technical issue when > it comes to confidentiality: *one* rogue or careless member of the > group is enough to compromise all the group conversations. The draft > mentions that the protocol scales to "thousands of participants". But > it is unrealistic to hope you can keep something secret when it is > shared by thousands of people. > Good point. Maybe information could be added on (intentional) degradation and/or retention? Best, Niels From nobody Tue Feb 13 04:21:35 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2A6F1241F5 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 04:21:33 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.92 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.92 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3Xli2hXKozCJ for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 04:21:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 00497120454 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 04:21:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1elZaT-00038Y-HA for hrpc@irtf.org; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 13:21:30 +0100 To: hrpc@irtf.org References: From: Niels ten Oever Message-ID: <4046d2b3-2f9b-0aeb-c23d-b0454249ac85@nielstenoever.net> Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 13:21:29 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Authenticated-As-Hash: f1842a279235a42f6aa2a2a81130733515c5a4ec X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Scan-Signature: 448baf4759cd3283a5930955cc61e1db Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Drafts and IETF 101 session X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 12:21:34 -0000 Hi Avri, On 02/12/2018 08:11 PM, avri doria wrote: > Hi, > > I am working on the summary of the comments on the RG drafts and should > have it in a day or so. So anyone who wants to get a comment in still > has time. > > With the IETF RG meeting coming up in a month or so, would like to find > out who has something they want to discuss or otherwise see on the agenda. > >>From my last request: > >> Also time to collect ideas for the upcoming HRPC meeting.  >> >> In addition to the continuing discussion of what next, what else would >> people like to see? >> >> - Who has something they want to speak about - a draft or some other paper We have been discussing about Science and Technology studies a lot, so maybe an introduction to that field of studies could be interesting. Next to that we're working hard on a new version of draft-tenoever-hrpc-association, and I expect we'll also have a new version of draft-tenoever-hrpc-political. >> >> - Do we want to invite a speaker. >> An (intro to) STS lecturer might be nice/interesting. My attention was also caught by the recent work of Luca Belli who coined the term 'the right to network self-determination' (cf https://www.opendemocracy.net/luca-belli/scramble-for-data-and-need-for-network-self-determination ) >> - Also plan to include discussion of updated drafts and any new drafts. >> Which should we expect? > As said: draft-tenoever-hrpc-association and draft-tenoever-hrpc-political Best, Niels > > Thanks > > avri > > > _______________________________________________ > hrpc mailing list > hrpc@irtf.org > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc > From nobody Tue Feb 13 04:30:11 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B905012E88B for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 04:30:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.92 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.92 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CK2sfxVoXtez for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 04:30:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E386E12E89A for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 04:29:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1elZiY-0005Na-0d for hrpc@irtf.org; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 13:29:50 +0100 From: Niels ten Oever To: hrpc@irtf.org References: <4046d2b3-2f9b-0aeb-c23d-b0454249ac85@nielstenoever.net> Message-ID: Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 13:29:49 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4046d2b3-2f9b-0aeb-c23d-b0454249ac85@nielstenoever.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Authenticated-As-Hash: f1842a279235a42f6aa2a2a81130733515c5a4ec X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Scan-Signature: 18b3e585b0ef946fc0f6ee9ab4fcc4ff Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Drafts and IETF 101 session X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 12:30:06 -0000 Even though it is not the newest of publications, I would also be very interested in a presentation by Ashwin Mathew about his methods and findings while studying BGP and his concept of 'distributed governance'. https://www.ischool.berkeley.edu/research/publications/2014/where-world-internet-locating-political-power-internet-infrastructure On 02/13/2018 01:21 PM, Niels ten Oever wrote: > Hi Avri, > > On 02/12/2018 08:11 PM, avri doria wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I am working on the summary of the comments on the RG drafts and should >> have it in a day or so. So anyone who wants to get a comment in still >> has time. >> >> With the IETF RG meeting coming up in a month or so, would like to find >> out who has something they want to discuss or otherwise see on the agenda. >> >> >From my last request: >> >>> Also time to collect ideas for the upcoming HRPC meeting.  >>> >>> In addition to the continuing discussion of what next, what else would >>> people like to see? >>> >>> - Who has something they want to speak about - a draft or some other paper > > We have been discussing about Science and Technology studies a lot, so > maybe an introduction to that field of studies could be interesting. > > Next to that we're working hard on a new version of > draft-tenoever-hrpc-association, and I expect we'll also have a new > version of draft-tenoever-hrpc-political. > >>> >>> - Do we want to invite a speaker. >>> > > An (intro to) STS lecturer might be nice/interesting. > > My attention was also caught by the recent work of Luca Belli who coined > the term 'the right to network self-determination' (cf > https://www.opendemocracy.net/luca-belli/scramble-for-data-and-need-for-network-self-determination > ) > >>> - Also plan to include discussion of updated drafts and any new drafts. >>> Which should we expect? >> > > As said: > draft-tenoever-hrpc-association and draft-tenoever-hrpc-political > > Best, > > Niels > >> >> Thanks >> >> avri >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> hrpc mailing list >> hrpc@irtf.org >> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc >> From nobody Tue Feb 13 04:31:29 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 838EE1275AB for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 04:31:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.92 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.92 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vm9EUvpf4ZHo for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 04:31:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D70E21201FA for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 04:31:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1elZk5-0005X8-3h for hrpc@irtf.org; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 13:31:25 +0100 To: hrpc@irtf.org References: <20180110072053.GA15439@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <20180123100220.GD28814@mir> <20180205082622.tfvi6kvkzeiahnzw@sources.org> From: Niels ten Oever Message-ID: Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 13:31:24 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180205082622.tfvi6kvkzeiahnzw@sources.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authenticated-As-Hash: f1842a279235a42f6aa2a2a81130733515c5a4ec X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Scan-Signature: 258bd43c1b7c380ff6f1b27dffaa1ebc Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] BGP and politics X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 12:31:28 -0000 On 02/05/2018 09:26 AM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 11:02:20AM +0100, > Niels ten Oever wrote > a message of 92 lines which said: > >> Thanks for this, I think this paper makes a similar point: >> >> https://policyreview.info/articles/analysis/myth-decentralised-internet > > I find this paper hard to read. It claims several times that BGP is > not decentralised but distributed but it apparently never defines > these terms. (And there is no agreed-upon definition, they are very > fuzzy terms, mostly used to make a political point, not for a rigorous > analysis.) > > It is an interesting question to see which one of BGP and DNS is the > closest from a "perfect" peer-to-peer ideal. IMHO, BGP is "more P2P" > (there is no root, no tree structure) but the entry barrier is higher > (there are much less AS than domains). > This PhD thesis tries to break this down, and is also wrestling with the socio-technical aspects of the Internet infrastructure and architecture: https://www.ischool.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/ashwin-dissertation.pdf > _______________________________________________ > hrpc mailing list > hrpc@irtf.org > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc > From nobody Tue Feb 13 05:53:12 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC52112E8B0 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 05:53:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zEaHQIqqJIJc for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 05:53:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from ayla.bortzmeyer.org (ayla.bortzmeyer.org [92.243.4.211]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E25BF12783A for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 05:53:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by ayla.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id 97AD3A2771; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 14:53:06 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail.sources.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8ACED1908BF; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 14:52:33 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 14:52:33 +0100 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Shivan Cc: Stephane Bortzmeyer , Hrpc Message-ID: <20180213135233.ylata6ukfcumzqgc@sources.org> References: <20180212203203.si3eoidsff7rkcjb@sources.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Transport: UUCP rules X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 9.3 X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Thoughts on MLS Internet Draft? X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 13:53:11 -0000 On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 05:06:37PM -0500, Shivan wrote a message of 46 lines which said: > ​That ​problem is intractable though - if someone can see a message, > they can take a photo of it. The problem is old (I remember seeing it mentioned in the first PGP documentations) and well-known but it is much worse for a large group. Two people can keep a secret, not hundreds of people. From nobody Tue Feb 13 05:58:11 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B12712E8B0 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 05:58:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xLbOfW7Vap8P for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 05:58:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from ayla.bortzmeyer.org (ayla.bortzmeyer.org [IPv6:2001:4b98:dc0:41:216:3eff:fe27:3d3f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C27B12741D for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 05:58:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by ayla.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id E138FA2771; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 14:58:06 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail.sources.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 97FEE1908BF; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 14:54:45 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 14:54:45 +0100 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Vittorio Bertola Cc: Stephane Bortzmeyer , Niels ten Oever , hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <20180213135445.4k6u7db3vny7s4jg@sources.org> References: <20171111132647.GA5997@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <944996404.10570.1518098615205@appsuite.open-xchange.com> <20180212205146.kaeexl5ul3f6zmlh@sources.org> <2096844716.521.1518470464142@appsuite.open-xchange.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2096844716.521.1518470464142@appsuite.open-xchange.com> X-Transport: UUCP rules X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 9.3 X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] About draft-tenoever-hrpc-association X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 13:58:10 -0000 On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 10:21:03PM +0100, Vittorio Bertola wrote a message of 41 lines which said: > the class of those who run a full node You mean a miner? Full nodes are different (I run a full Bitcoin node.) > and collusionbetween the miners to make false results would be > detected > > But still, since they are the only ones adding new blocks, if acting > together, they would be able to publicly alter/fork/takeover/whatever > the blockchain. Yes. My point is not that they cannot, but that it would be detected (by full nodes). From nobody Tue Feb 13 08:57:35 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3793E12D847 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 08:57:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.92 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.92 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5UpjMBmR194N for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 08:57:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B1836126CE8 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 08:57:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eldtY-0004jK-UM for hrpc@irtf.org; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 17:57:29 +0100 To: hrpc@irtf.org References: <20171111132647.GA5997@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> <944996404.10570.1518098615205@appsuite.open-xchange.com> From: Niels ten Oever Message-ID: Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 17:57:27 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <944996404.10570.1518098615205@appsuite.open-xchange.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authenticated-As-Hash: f1842a279235a42f6aa2a2a81130733515c5a4ec X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Scan-Signature: 71c358205736690f5000c0a682c32dd6 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] About draft-tenoever-hrpc-association X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 16:57:34 -0000 Hi, Would this be a better description: The structuring of DNS as a hierarchical authority structure also brings about specific characteristic, namely the possibility of centralized policy making vis a vis the management and operation of Top Level Domains, which is what (in part) happens at ICANN. The impact of ICANN processes on human rights will not be discussed here. Best, Niels On 02/08/2018 03:03 PM, Vittorio Bertola wrote: > >> Il 6 febbraio 2018 alle 22.25 Niels ten Oever ha scritto: >> >> >> Hi all, >> >>> Let's be precise: the DNS is not centralized (if it were, you would >>> have to talk to ICANN each time you change an IP address). >> >> I don't think the text says that the DNS is centralized, but the current >> hierarchical structuring does allow for a centralized venue for policy >> making vis a vis the DNS, right? > > "a"? "Centralized policy making on the management and operation of > domain names" is also being done in a number of different and > uncorrelated places, either for each of the subtrees in the DNS > hierarchy or for those nodes that have certain feature. First of all > this happens at the national lawmaking level; also, each TLD defines > their policies, and often second level domain administrators define > policies too. I'd say that the policy making is as hierarchical as the > system itself, or if you prefer centralized at each of the layers of the > hierarchy for anything existing in the nodes below, rather than simply > "centralized". > > Also, "surveillance of the services running on the domain, domain based > censorship [RFC7754 ], or > impersonation of the domain through DNS cache poisoning" are things that > could also happen if the DNS were flat rather than hierarchical. > > All in all, I guess that what you were trying to say is that if you > could get a domain name without having to register it somewhere, just by > publishing the registration independently, no one could censor/influence > you by taking the domain down or by attaching conditions to the > registration. This looks to me like blockchain hype: it's actually true > for a part of the potential threats (but not, as I said, for some > others), but, as of today, no one has found yet a workable way to remove > that last piece of centralization (actually, even the current toy-scale > blockchains are controlled by an elite class of miners because they > require so many resources that only relatively few people can afford to > run the nodes, so I would not say that they could solve this problem). > > Moreover, the reason why the DNS is hierarchical is not because its > authors wanted to introduce a central point of control, but exactly the > opposite: the authors wanted to distribute control and management of the > namespace so to make it less centralized and less controllable (even if, > possibly, for practical engineering reasons rather than for political > and ethical ones). So it makes sense to point out the remaining risks, > but perhaps one should also recognize the positive, liberal features of > such a hierarchical model. > > Ciao > > -- > > *Vittorio Bertola* > Head of Policy & Innovation > > Cell: +39 348 7015022 > Skype: in-skype-ox@bertola.eu > Email: vittorio.bertola@open-xchange.com > > > > Twitter: @openexchange - Facebook: > OpenXchange - Web: > www.open-xchange.com > Open-Xchange AG, Rollnerstr. 14, 90408 Nuremberg, District Court > Nuremberg HRB 24738 > Managing Board: Rafael Laguna de la Vera, Carsten Dirks, Michael > Knapstein, Stephan Martin > Chairman of the Board: Richard Seibt > > European Office: > Open-Xchange GmbH, Olper Huette 5f, D-57462 Olpe, Germany, District > Court Siegen, HRB 8718 > Managing Director: Frank Hoberg > > US Office: > Open-Xchange. Inc., 530 Lytton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301, USA > > Confidentiality Warning: This message and any attachments are intended > only for the use of the intended recipient(s), are confidential, and may > be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby > notified that any review, retransmission, conversion to hard copy, > copying, circulation or other use of this message and any attachments is > strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please > notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and delete this message > and any attachments from your system. > > > > _______________________________________________ > hrpc mailing list > hrpc@irtf.org > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc > From nobody Tue Feb 13 15:52:26 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C23CE12D96D for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 15:52:25 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.7 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mnot.net header.b=Q9t0+002; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=DlGFgRso Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rK7qtlzrL8BP for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 15:52:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D723112DA02 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 15:52:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F86721925; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 18:52:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 13 Feb 2018 18:52:22 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=efqX0GgJHW0l8DeIDohvcKyTagZnl wT5BgjWFg3ex9s=; b=Q9t0+002QqaJLsLZCP0OAaLhfnNYtHJt4t2A7j+mBjeow 6MkpBUzRSHnl/xb+p57agmsvOrSMtG1gb0kAsR80/95fM5vU1U5V2a0uDEx/A5cr PIzA5Fnoo7hV/0eTlPWBtPoppEdzkp+Mij6DbxqVM7a1HYm5YwGK0sDjMpUjdhEJ 1u3X/7xGgVEqpM+y/e8iJrqY3boN7EkWSYkR4Xvj3YslytjHzBnJEA9ApsoXT7Vs P/AzH75VihwYiy9pbHQNGi+dWkfjcUIOmksjbqZwPhnkOK9tHh7Tx32e3JmMAPsM 8ySwx7RM0LHqi/oukbQP/s2H3SeqnHEtWLS69tO0A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=efqX0G gJHW0l8DeIDohvcKyTagZnlwT5BgjWFg3ex9s=; b=DlGFgRsoZun7PFKIn1fQT5 exev/oYxAqjRNTB2reEY/5k+yIE6bybnEdxMDrmCYeU2ondm6PPjQcNPP0S3oIH/ dOC1+alEl9dC/2pu/oP0Fk3eBwEfjvq1+pA2S5SFgrOWU2vS3gtb2MeNvImAThnT JExekFQlT4DZoWCtQSfG8Qyn845gKgwMXsLADeqm4Yum87Ns9/8AgDm2ZtvepO1h MihJskFXje9kqR035U29WXKigCD11FOjSwONNemnmaF2hphDG7KnCKJqEDPje6I/ sMEfqqC5xAXRyZZVrrND74g/8AeKHfGwpG70X5im3Mx8OLoYpGcR+US6J6xX7WeQ == X-ME-Sender: Received: from [192.168.1.25] (unknown [144.136.175.28]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id D85F27E539; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 18:52:20 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.2 \(3445.5.20\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: <20180212203203.si3eoidsff7rkcjb@sources.org> Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 10:52:18 +1100 Cc: Shivan , Hrpc Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <361E2EEB-C6CE-40B7-87AB-E8BE9C20BE4F@mnot.net> References: <20180212203203.si3eoidsff7rkcjb@sources.org> To: Stephane Bortzmeyer X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.5.20) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Thoughts on MLS Internet Draft? X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 23:52:26 -0000 On 13 Feb 2018, at 7:32 am, Stephane Bortzmeyer = wrote: >=20 >> Wondering if anyone had any thoughts on the early draft of MLS = (Messaging >> Layer Security) protocol: >>=20 >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-barnes-mls-protocol/ >=20 > The goal is important (secure *group* communications), I cannot really > say something intelligent about the protocol, but it is certainly > something to encourage. >=20 > The security considerations mentions only *technical* security > issues. But group communications have a big non-technical issue when > it comes to confidentiality: *one* rogue or careless member of the > group is enough to compromise all the group conversations. The draft > mentions that the protocol scales to "thousands of participants". But > it is unrealistic to hope you can keep something secret when it is > shared by thousands of people. =46rom a HR standpoint, I find this draft fascinating. HTTPS is explicitly a two-party protocol, and there have been a number = of attempts to interpose additional parties into it. Offhand, I'd say = most Internet protocols that are secure follow that pattern. OTOH this protocol is multi-party by design -- which is fine if all of = the parties are peers (which seems to be assumed). If one or more = parties' participation is coercive -- e.g., an employer, a government, = etc. -- things can go pear-shaped pretty quickly, from a HR perspective. I'm not sure what the protocol itself can do to avoid that, beyond the = obvious things it'd be doing anyway (not allowing a party to interpose = itself without some explicit permission, etc.). There might be client UI = / configuration things that make abuse here easier or harder - should = that go into the protocol draft? I can also see echos of this in the forthcoming discussion of = draft-yasskin-http-origin-signed-responses; HTTPS URLs have a semantic = of being communication between two identified parties, with certain = properties (authentication, integrity, confidentiality); is it = reasonable to use them for something that loses confidentiality by = involving a third party? Cheers, -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Wed Feb 14 11:07:33 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE01512D84A for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 11:07:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CrboGFjnC14K for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 11:07:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1266A127867 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 11:07:28 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.46,513,1511823600"; d="scan'208";a="254814825" Received: from zmbs3.inria.fr ([128.93.142.16]) by mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 14 Feb 2018 20:07:26 +0100 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 20:07:26 +0100 (CET) From: Harry Halpin To: Mark Nottingham Cc: Stephane Bortzmeyer , Shivan , Hrpc Message-ID: <179523098.5686767.1518635246896.JavaMail.zimbra@inria.fr> In-Reply-To: <361E2EEB-C6CE-40B7-87AB-E8BE9C20BE4F@mnot.net> References: <20180212203203.si3eoidsff7rkcjb@sources.org> <361E2EEB-C6CE-40B7-87AB-E8BE9C20BE4F@mnot.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Originating-IP: [179.62.75.66] X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.0.9_GA_6191 (ZimbraWebClient - FF57 (Linux)/8.0.9_GA_6191) Thread-Topic: Thoughts on MLS Internet Draft? Thread-Index: nE1Lz+5g7Jtq4QCAznJ1sTqsCedJhg== Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Thoughts on MLS Internet Draft? X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 19:07:32 -0000 ----- Mail original ----- > De: "Mark Nottingham" > =C0: "Stephane Bortzmeyer" > Cc: "Shivan" , "Hrpc" > Envoy=E9: Mercredi 14 F=E9vrier 2018 00:52:18 > Objet: Re: [hrpc] Thoughts on MLS Internet Draft? >=20 > On 13 Feb 2018, at 7:32 am, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote= : > >=20 > >> Wondering if anyone had any thoughts on the early draft of MLS (Messag= ing > >> Layer Security) protocol: > >>=20 > >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-barnes-mls-protocol/ > >=20 > > The goal is important (secure *group* communications), I cannot really > > say something intelligent about the protocol, but it is certainly > > something to encourage. > >=20 > > The security considerations mentions only *technical* security > > issues. But group communications have a big non-technical issue when > > it comes to confidentiality: *one* rogue or careless member of the > > group is enough to compromise all the group conversations. The draft > > mentions that the protocol scales to "thousands of participants". But > > it is unrealistic to hope you can keep something secret when it is > > shared by thousands of people. Note that it is a huge improvement over one giant shared secret key, which = is the previous method used by Signal -=20 or even the lack of encryption on group chats at all by Telegram (despite m= any users believing they are secure). So I can't imagine any reason why we would not support this protocol in terms = of user security/privacy, as the perfect should not be the enemy of the good.=20 While adding people to a group naturally increases the chances of security = breaches, it is a valid use-case, as there are many places (Russia and Iran come to mind) where the freedom to assembl= y is organized via *very* large Telegram (multi-thousand user) groups, which is the kind of app this protocol is aim= ing at. We discovered this via doing=20 a study on secure messaging with human rights activists, and were a bit su= rprised by this as well! https://nextleap.eu/res/Ermoshina_EuroUSEC_final.pdf A sequel with stats is coming out with much more users, as we recorded thos= e numbers but needed time. However, the main interesting result is that for many human rights activists, the chances of = their local client being seized is considered *much* higher than pervasive surveillance. So in some ways, perhaps the ent= ire peer-to-peer with storing key on the device is more a "Western privacy activist" model than one actually needed by peop= le at risk.=20 >=20 > From a HR standpoint, I find this draft fascinating. >=20 > HTTPS is explicitly a two-party protocol, and there have been a number of > attempts to interpose additional parties into it. Offhand, I'd say most > Internet protocols that are secure follow that pattern. >=20 > OTOH this protocol is multi-party by design -- which is fine if all of th= e > parties are peers (which seems to be assumed). If one or more parties' > participation is coercive -- e.g., an employer, a government, etc. -- thi= ngs > can go pear-shaped pretty quickly, from a HR perspective. The obvious other design choice is a shared key ran by a central server aft= er it runs two-party key establishment with every member of the group. The goal of MLS is an IETF standard for Signal-like peer-to-peer encrypted communication, so the goal is avoid coercion on the server-end (s= uch as can be done in HTTPS) and thus the likely view a shared key ran by a sin= gle server as a more dangerous threat than a peer being compromised. Again, tha= t might be the wrong threat model, but that's what people's goals are right n= ow.=20 >=20 > I'm not sure what the protocol itself can do to avoid that, beyond the > obvious things it'd be doing anyway (not allowing a party to interpose > itself without some explicit permission, etc.). There might be client UI = / > configuration things that make abuse here easier or harder - should that = go > into the protocol draft? >=20 > I can also see echos of this in the forthcoming discussion of > draft-yasskin-http-origin-signed-responses; HTTPS URLs have a semantic of > being communication between two identified parties, with certain properti= es > (authentication, integrity, confidentiality); is it reasonable to use the= m > for something that loses confidentiality by involving a third party? Great questions, and I agree the protocol needs work but I find the design = to be really going in the right direction and overall, fairly solid (although it's mostly Oxford, in full disclosure = my co-workers at Inria are helping).=20 There is a call for a BOF in London, so having people from this group there= would be great.=20 >=20 > Cheers, >=20 > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ >=20 > _______________________________________________ > hrpc mailing list > hrpc@irtf.org > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc >=20 From nobody Wed Feb 14 13:59:11 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 041D512426E for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 13:59:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.701 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mnot.net header.b=ftdt2OOl; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=G3LlO2WZ Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Jom0jXxFkXA9 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 13:59:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B29F1201FA for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 13:59:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA8C720BB8; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 16:59:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 14 Feb 2018 16:59:06 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=muwmTonAOkhzVh8lZnEAKSl13Mu91 bCu14rFDmJYDGg=; b=ftdt2OOlZPqOGrfujLzETElO8KVNdS+ddr/FdwYXQyu0O IfiFIfYuKrbdW/bUaqlf++xvzQhJuVncZgOY7/ehafC7aOx5fH5DehmB9jyzA5QD 49wiwbGkJbjP+/yKnjP2B95gKtXOXz2d3R0fbRDkhAFqd7G3GD3+l1bxG4nY8i8Y IQ3Wj99VoZzr3p1hPKheqMUgnttMgpcOAXXyA1CZf23y2K9Y03YAh4/TVZlglwNX YYXid4ajftHlMLYa3VB+N3WOYpklCdpMcAdw9R7+hUQrQMSq2y4vk63IAbwqBh6R Ubc7zLAXlnHXxwD//6dyQ+RpgCM5ZrGfOZ6WsMrCw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=muwmTo nAOkhzVh8lZnEAKSl13Mu91bCu14rFDmJYDGg=; b=G3LlO2WZdauPaxg9/fmKeM PqGeuosBEiZJ+jdj12WWBkV+Aroe7vJrl7rMsdHNS3k8wNUl+YAv1w7AWyrmh/fT mbUd7EdPcW07mHkuaGYpM/+rRVuyCLnjmMqWyKzRNMduOSAt/GSUH14Q6O1r8xFI 3OR5P6ppqeS0i4s60sNYDB93l6ivFG9r7ZjbA3Sap5M6iU5brVRwJYVvl/liFNv4 b6EjSW2cSQZDgNKBt1eYTmbv2G8I9VJIDUBjNFDwO94c+THgFeBFFMjAufwL9xEY a/kpuZJwdlArnffCflueiQSzp/DJffQAjycL73o1KcBwX1GuLxRm+G13dd2Hgvww == X-ME-Sender: Received: from [192.168.1.18] (unknown [144.136.175.28]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 6DE58240DE; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 16:59:05 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.2 \(3445.5.20\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: <179523098.5686767.1518635246896.JavaMail.zimbra@inria.fr> Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 08:59:01 +1100 Cc: Stephane Bortzmeyer , Shivan , Hrpc Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <29F4A9A7-28AD-49AA-9EE0-163B6BD9D187@mnot.net> References: <20180212203203.si3eoidsff7rkcjb@sources.org> <361E2EEB-C6CE-40B7-87AB-E8BE9C20BE4F@mnot.net> <179523098.5686767.1518635246896.JavaMail.zimbra@inria.fr> To: Harry Halpin X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.5.20) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Thoughts on MLS Internet Draft? X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 21:59:10 -0000 > On 15 Feb 2018, at 6:07 am, Harry Halpin = wrote: >=20 > Note that it is a huge improvement over one giant shared secret key, = which is the previous method used by Signal -=20 > or even the lack of encryption on group chats at all by Telegram = (despite many users believing they are secure). So > I can't imagine any reason why we would not support this protocol in = terms of user security/privacy, as the > perfect should not be the enemy of the good.=20 Oh, absolutely. I was more thinking about how one of the oft-heard = arguments against standardising MiTM is that "it's hard to secure more = than two-party communication," and how this might be used as evidence = otherwise. What's been more convincing in those discussions has been the argument = that RFC7230 standardises HTTPS as two-party communication, and = broadening it to multi-party can't be done without violating the = assumptions of users and other parties; i.e., the standard is = effectively a contract, and you can't break it. Here, we're seeing the opposite; security is being improved for = communication that's already explicitly multi-party. Ratchets are awesome :) Cheers, -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Wed Feb 14 14:21:30 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEC2B12426E for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 14:21:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.311 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.311 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cs.tcd.ie Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tZ4aLgaU-S80 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 14:21:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 929861201FA for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 14:21:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22752BE6F; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 22:21:18 +0000 (GMT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2glo20PQYxjo; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 22:21:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [10.244.2.138] (95-45-153-252-dynamic.agg2.phb.bdt-fng.eircom.net [95.45.153.252]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AF243BE64; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 22:21:16 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1518646876; bh=j4elu2pYQXxa3NKkrWFD9m0VtaF6Cv+B6/PtVspQrZk=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=2J8C0GP+ykHaFwf3G6zo6FlWvqC8oE9gzEe8tlTZtcCTyp0k5I0NQPsqT5Faw9mZe Wt/Hb7Tbh38cGDLaRlcnGL2ogerVUSEHRFMVYlfTC5hyidrbiESJdxf1U3gFzsOem3 Q1THHsGX/8xvhUDyyFFLT+IJzyfBbaxpDWZhZF1I= To: Mark Nottingham , Harry Halpin Cc: Shivan , Stephane Bortzmeyer , Hrpc References: <20180212203203.si3eoidsff7rkcjb@sources.org> <361E2EEB-C6CE-40B7-87AB-E8BE9C20BE4F@mnot.net> <179523098.5686767.1518635246896.JavaMail.zimbra@inria.fr> <29F4A9A7-28AD-49AA-9EE0-163B6BD9D187@mnot.net> From: Stephen Farrell Openpgp: id=5BB5A6EA5765D2C5863CAE275AB2FAF17B172BEA; url= Message-ID: Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 22:21:16 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <29F4A9A7-28AD-49AA-9EE0-163B6BD9D187@mnot.net> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="sDVju9ryYSpp8AhaXzQAd5EpM9NXJb29b" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Thoughts on MLS Internet Draft? X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 22:21:29 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --sDVju9ryYSpp8AhaXzQAd5EpM9NXJb29b Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="5NyqJnRznRvs2rgu2uQ6OZLwFrfUlPa90"; protected-headers="v1" From: Stephen Farrell To: Mark Nottingham , Harry Halpin Cc: Shivan , Stephane Bortzmeyer , Hrpc Message-ID: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Thoughts on MLS Internet Draft? References: <20180212203203.si3eoidsff7rkcjb@sources.org> <361E2EEB-C6CE-40B7-87AB-E8BE9C20BE4F@mnot.net> <179523098.5686767.1518635246896.JavaMail.zimbra@inria.fr> <29F4A9A7-28AD-49AA-9EE0-163B6BD9D187@mnot.net> In-Reply-To: <29F4A9A7-28AD-49AA-9EE0-163B6BD9D187@mnot.net> --5NyqJnRznRvs2rgu2uQ6OZLwFrfUlPa90 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------1DE7B7D15266416835F63208" Content-Language: en-GB This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------1DE7B7D15266416835F63208 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 14/02/18 21:59, Mark Nottingham wrote: > Oh, absolutely. I was more thinking about how one of the oft-heard > arguments against standardising MiTM is that "it's hard to secure > more than two-party communication," and how this might be used as > evidence otherwise. >=20 > What's been more convincing in those discussions has been the > argument that RFC7230 standardises HTTPS as two-party communication, > and broadening it to multi-party can't be done without violating the > assumptions of users and other parties; i.e., the standard is > effectively a contract, and you can't break it. I agree that the former argument isn't by itself strong (mail transport security works pretty well after all) and that the latter is better. However, the former argument is fine if the context of the discussion relates to an existing two party protocol, which has been the case with many of discussions related to breaking TLS. On the MLS thing - it seems like a good thing to me, if it works out as planned. (Even better if we could get interop between different services using the results, but that's sadly too ambitious I guess.) Cheers, S. --=20 PGP key change time for me. New-ID 7B172BEA; old-ID 805F8DA2 expires Jan 24 2018. NewWithOld sigs in keyservers. Sorry if that mucks something up;-) --------------1DE7B7D15266416835F63208 Content-Type: application/pgp-keys; name="0x7B172BEA.asc" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="0x7B172BEA.asc" -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- mQINBFo9UDIBEADUH4ZPcUnX5WWRWO4kEkHea5Y5eEvZjSwe/YA+G0nrTuOU9nem CP5PMvmh5Cg8gBTyWyN4Z2+O25p9Tja5zUb+vPMWYvOtokRrp46yhFZOmiS5b6kT q0IqYzsEv5HI58S+QtaFq978CRa4xH9Gi9u4yzUmT03QNIGDXE37honcAM4MOEtE gvw4fVhVWJuyy3w//0F2tzKrEMjmL5VGuD/Q9+G/7abuXiYNNd9ZFjv4625AUWwy +pAh4EKzS1FE7BOZp9daMu9MUQmDqtZUbUv0Q+DnQAB/4tNncejJPz0p2z3MWCp5 iSwHiQvytYgatMp34a50l6CWqa13n6vY8VcPlIqOVz+7L+WiVfxLbeVqBwV+4uL9 to9zLF9IyUvl94lCxpscR2kgRgpM6A5LylRDkR6E0oudFnJgb097ZaNyuY1ETghV B5Uir1GCYChs8NUNumTHXiOkuzk+Gs4DAHx/a78YxBolKHi+esLH8r2k4LyM2lp5 FmBKjG7cGcpBGmWavACYEa7rwAadg4uBx9SHMV5i33vDXQUZcmW0vslQ2Is02NMK 7uB7E7HlVE1IM1zNkVTYYGkKreU8DVQu8qNOtPVE/CdaCJ/pbXoYeHz2B1Nvbl9t lyWxn5XiHzFPJleXc0ksb9SkJokAfwTSZzTxeQPER8la5lsEEPbU/cDTcwARAQAB tCFTdGVwaGVuIEZhcnJlbGwgPHN0ZXBoZW5AamVsbC5pZT6JAj0EEwEIACcFAlo9 UYwCGwMFCQmUJgAFCwkIBwIGFQgJCgsCBBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQWrL68XsXK+qG CxAApYHWYgGOIL3G6/OpkejdAkQoCVQAK8LJUSf6vzwost4iVfxIKcKW/3RqKNKk rRl8beJ7j1CWXAz9+VXAOsE9+zNxXIDgGA7HlvJnhffl+qwibVgiHgUcJFhCSbBr sjC+1uULaTU8zYEyET//GOGPLF+X+degkE/sesh4zcEAjF7fGPnlncdCCH3tvPZZ sdTcjwOCRVonKsDgQzBTCMz/RPBfEFX44HZx4g1UQAcCA4xlucY8QkJEyCrSNGpG nvGK8DcGSmnstl1/a9fnlhpdFxieX3oY2phJ1WKkYTn6Advrek3UP71CKxpgtPmk d3iUUz/VZa0Cv6YxQXskspRDVEvdCMYSQBtJPQ4y2+5UxVR9GIQXenwYp9AP2niv Voh+ITsDWWeWnnvYMq07rSDjq0nGdj41MJkNX+Yb2PXVyXItcj5ybE3T2+y3pSBG FEZYJGuaL4NwtBJFMOdOtBmUOPbetS2971EL3Izxb7ibOZWDwexv+8R6SWYfP1wV N3p46RyBQuXqJV8ccE11m6vtZTGSYgnLUUFZMRQYH+0hwuYe0T3AA18xDdSYsa8v ovCCd3l5S4UNzIM2PMChqGrEzKapUpZg7+8ACcxRU3b9Ihd7WYjJ+pQPCoWYKozv tEvenbNpE/govO/ED3B14e+R2yevRPjRrsN7PJzSf15fQLuJARwEEAEIAAYFAlo9 UqAACgkQLzyHNoBfjaLrSwf+MIHbFRQ4O5cmLYR5sIByWelN3SuRN/gW8rpKo9Ok Cz6An8uV/iCXy5tNMLzzi0BFl8f22DwBcC5qy9qnlIAdogWam1qWoTAoAD8veEqm uKhYrqJsCcAyNrKYmK0hP3rpHxx1LySDmKYXmw/8qtBXKHTouMm+5tSsznhykRMT AAr2p7PSaHgo+hIVaW/rKSspHjDhhZS+G9mtOZad1IH29M6G1Q1NCO0Ywe8krKLQ IAQlFxtgvOqpPOZNzeKBa/+KbE8TGgMWrkOhC8OeEM5PVzdDhlhD9kPzB/pCKDF5 DofJ/ZRqnDpbKPQ0bsW38AOig3kOc0A27awiBEw3urqR1bQyU3RlcGhlbiBGYXJy ZWxsICgyMDE3KSA8c3RlcGhlbi5mYXJyZWxsQGNzLnRjZC5pZT6JAkAEEwEIACoC GwMFCQmUJgAFCwkIBwIGFQgJCgsCBBYCAwECHgECF4AFAlo+o3cCGQEACgkQWrL6 8XsXK+qO0A//ZsfQzyXrZlu/eEV5jU620yeOM3P7SW3C3UQYdCgZ/TlvxGgKow5o DSXgjMiUyq9csGqbPBxlDYSxFZHNeDVKYIuP2ZK24tw5k6duTh4+sFwUualTMlcp 0zBCIzn3hRcsRvuPKHfl5+6oOi0+xqx3jX/s/69L/fvHmdSKet5LIUAxoYaZkTCr uFrPWb01tgAl5JExWkhmCY98iD+EeiIMAWBjMw1xV+p0uCwNbN6XDzcToK7wsm+t AIiWUy3DpP60a6WbVwdV0HNt2WZq5U5Jdh2k4S+sN2CnYk4tTW7jHjsWarV3FLIS COObADZuB7ljU4kYfdwZ+WzenXY4LGlxGQSlAblGjwZe4EIkCXAJUtzJhoFUuGaF /PlWjxqV3UFRcgTERZTijguVyREre8GNERNgvDxZvuXssEjvz9X5JfcIZDIJpdzh LiEIj9noUbfx1SzB5KDPQj0O7elMHa1671/rwWcpGr/MfVPTOik4H7F8rcVJelce ZTzC4tvya7M+jM4fyFWWt8Y4atTixUiP7U9o4uBZCQ0GzvsmFA4XLqn2pA5rVizM XnGbGOjufAP/efEJ4ul3qvjYe8ye8DXEDjKAxo/tuHYtk19XCi83QzFhWls5TT+X QeVTMEvVqo9Wek8yoxo67qvLKKqIcG9givQd8MxYNAbNYgSPtkbhZ8SJARwEEAEI AAYFAlo9UqAACgkQLzyHNoBfjaLzHAgAlWT6NXEGtw/r1miKNGcopzvzILQ9oB8r KI9U9EL6tOf/y2V5oYee/GyQDb3ZdoPxxYYcJf+RyiH1nMoqUIZiZJaf3bJXinDZ 5+AdfE++UR2NBvqaNyC6u3r24jo1B/sagKbYtWgsYtRqHLD4IWi37MZrVyjBuF7u 14Q07+uhjq6mX2O/tHpCYw/Q82tbeTRPyUf1WQOAfD1kfBpW9PvAva5Iw9FWeXpC XRzwxnCZhYfGfqtuSw6CPBYLdbikqML6FZ7EDuTBb/8um1wK7Y9bgeIQC+CYjhYB 5RXa1tDJRab2Js4luCvSR0w/CgHw26293tlve2Q6UTrmHxP5U22DlrQuU3RlcGhl biBGYXJyZWxsIDxzdGVwaGVuQHRvbGVyYW50bmV0d29ya3MuY29tPokCPQQTAQgA JwUCWj1RWgIbAwUJCZQmAAULCQgHAgYVCAkKCwIEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAAKCRBasvrx excr6jscEADEcB0WQEZn2AkrzDs1RhL0Lp6cZi0BigofkbcGfdhJyMSs19C0dhvn crAFClVI6/Udw3yFtDyYtOCf2W3M3A1K6/RfEizCLzTsdFIhni9gOJLlUpXViQtg rlstjk7hqVV3Ooz4BlCqS4cG7rfqf4LQQPpTAuFUEV9I28FBUB2irqC+v4gTysIg pMw0bA1yBU9sX5jE/tRkzqnuzZrkwiobDtRFJ9qp+7O2JtcY4EsVtLAsaodJKc5c F8R4OvB1n66vxxcgg9Eh4JNWZ47xsaCmAGo1Bcb2jIY35OtgAL7gCGLRSMKTtAaP y1/fEgIqhCljJ9x40Fkn/3r2BX21WC9HFSPFTBz2RluLRzxdgxOrkYK8EiHUPoE5 b1AEzZKw2AbeXfr57f5zYsN3IqfbQLUjMYtUN1wK3Pjb+idD972wyXMWt8uOzlI7 b9Ocu+nYm2whBfJv9Pmp3QYTmPz+LB9lH65VNVUSxSXVr5iWXO3qx1HtEiGEqkpo rMQCTh3T5Ud3PvMSRBFFKNs9WhJ/Lxz+SV30WLwG6dr5mQqlzAhb4Phc/zekZyXR dS/oDKrBLUucS36O//49JeyRi1QvOfxnfmIqRIAf/k3PoYJmTo5E82//r5Qj3YGl Ru78ba0HArxs+ACD6AnEHHcbswpbtVEKYzlSu0Ar0Dc7vRWM/IyQdIkBHAQQAQgA BgUCWj1SoAAKCRAvPIc2gF+NosIsB/9f/29FNla3BJfGIEIDnhrqGD0i9bSa89Sq Bd++uG06TQgW5wsqtNcrwn81yZTq6XE6i9VtD4GKfqC0d4KZJr9bnbeD81cI64VO dL8zJWJs0vj5EIXCobKyX74Kb4uePUyZqwT2Q74I116u/HwA9/FXsPo5isbh4ZqD 4t0VHpWkmfq1FPT9a/JPyX46qKqB2Fce/7Qy+SQP1NfkuUlbhUH/JG9aSSYvk3lz nNiH41x9M+FDlL106itXOubrl3oi2fT3fsSedq7uzt+IV0DQEeNaoQAUuwEhdB8I WOMqN2woDjGVKJftfsSWY9ilZrnDBNDrp0vRqcx33LUMkIw4d7iBuQINBFo9UDIB EAD6DdHQfMav8OXfhjTteoarOrlJTSdci727xiezGPuBHmpvceBRZgRasdbaMc4H Jee+R9+5x/nLPCuy/DxDyIjwIUeJNgc+l7LjI9WfpHTD8U4xxjvR5Mi7+ToQQUOU NuzT0O0pyuxP1uY3RehHEhOVfBZO59ipSeZL5iQC6T5MsK1SKfs51pLa5ToC1rc8 tBJ4zZmxRAyZiYc/AH2uZ/6rYjTTkAn1DVI9DYo2D/zE4bGjXdJW5pKphFB2lX3d G4I7ODi+5e1H6A/QpCu6z8/ZkIQ+9T1xcX/YwiFeA7PbTuW/eITbMbI1eV3+fyym 9aT7Rsflmp31Zxtr+sZwGGZf00ooMBFmqOS//NUQ/Vf3vDUew1h5QU1yDaWT3NAp vi+XWPH9TPy6TMfZA2FThHf11sX/gDBa5JWQZbptPEcmoazpiKZt91CrFPOaoXDP ck/Q61dfmr/oPikfByYnASIM3OwEuXqyQ9JDRfKrem5r+oA/wxWb5jELElAhOpny qMMvOh7uz1foUssL8MAv2TGXmxpVJ8Nu4je6wf96Z22fQ0D38zud+CKH3bMP3ayX XJBcdPoENrzFbWP5FTg/4TTDJ3vOAHZR5iCunYghx8b7Ffa4UbkwlD+dh8GiIAtv T51Ac0cO0Wc0Zjc57zPUz1zloMbf+zb1Bsn7DuEQoqj1gwARAQABiQIlBBgBCAAP BQJaPVAyAhsMBQkJlCYAAAoJEFqy+vF7FyvqrC8P/1tF6TeR83xD6MasqXyrBjwc LmziaF0Mlkj8k/YUiZ/knb53n97xQnh9yxPv0TT8Wpfdn3BmvqGyh8+ouHX9jMOx iRkMdNhIauVYY/8jmRfBSYWcFkfMzdYasvdLtmYJgx252HKTFdeOrszoOjWjEzwm h+tca3AFMu/nB++/KAmi5UJV7zsZ7uYJ5jm97LV5SLjNJIXXM+lHqCDrjDaDhNcz mq1LCRlU6/WDjvkuwaVhZG4lXxMDrvKnXMkjseQ2oKjwrIdfQM86H1z5J31lfhqo p+of0cimcIsBgSCPu+h96LHuAzeRBCbDKeqrfZtAZAGsokRina9947fRWxXHh3O6 6ILmXKNRxxWbDkPvYnQWUat8SbSTDoPWrDIGDRIAypqYo3pcN2OE0C1chqgDZQxk r+9kYZQpupOAN2TR+fM7JvbO9coKI8Uqog8CopoMeDQkd0YjcqlB1E0svODHTzcS oRzogDBYDqNLP7qVkNXpcOAXSVioBgiSDf7o5RdS/qmUyXBIeq6I5z8xBcd+BQ/n /9Frkm6K7IKP3ngUP4wEoiPx5ZE5+fPIScGmVUcZIMhkvMvem9XXh1yyhqN14gfj mLwPGdWbrgG8QUe0s2WeWIyss6uTiyF+ZbJSo2XOKVc3YFMVUUfgyudqAV1wWdZi nUk+H3pkqOKoHAy/8fST =3Dg8yx -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- --------------1DE7B7D15266416835F63208-- --5NyqJnRznRvs2rgu2uQ6OZLwFrfUlPa90-- --sDVju9ryYSpp8AhaXzQAd5EpM9NXJb29b Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJahLZcAAoJEFqy+vF7FyvqGoYQAM3+JiuZ+vshDA3Il9U7o9vn wOII/+FSpVjRskj46GPH1klwAg/CMKgarZPwWilstSkhVeHYUwqDy4xCbP5g3Oyv 2rAzqI+7DVN5Q8daHNwAwL8as/yTCP7VHp0ViQCjoJOLFoHg5FVaNsW6nWa4MiN0 e60JsZ8qNfk4wp6ZZ1N/mj7IJquHNSoLIQx65R7hMctP42rmf58s7+MoywlZUJ5Q S+h4uS1G9bdT57x7wHkb1h9KE2vFyZwH15aVXp2NxRmBjA1JaPtsCdYlkCD3LXXD 1VioKF5R6+ZzF1F+mP8kuLiQF6zynuZN1JkVxVXXaN+muXy6rdzh6Cqv79NQNhaP aJO7uz+uGtlFX7ABM4MDVyw8jrq+F3y37DFr99MGrtbtuJ3iYbDueYN1lJ9057i9 4wzRsLHrppt8bm4nUQDgIx7KZJjoSKs+cDDa8nmeUkwPgr32GISBQK/Hy2lFBwCF WZV8L05IGSFOMsSFDinppgkz6r8gT9zkHvkjjvbeP9gRjr5IeDo0wPohgYrrWIQo Lmbz03beOUSelMMiJIhd66csz0IEDevnRRFXWSZlHj0FaCgPZmblHipF56uXKXKw f9Nuw7UFIi3yzURwRiQo0u9XY49LK0Cculkm7tUU9dDbA+wbqu3B41F4KNUnTsxt fyzwBcLXx61uNJX7Nv8q =2mYe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --sDVju9ryYSpp8AhaXzQAd5EpM9NXJb29b-- From nobody Wed Feb 14 15:36:34 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12D65127058 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 15:36:33 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.701 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=derechosdigitales.org header.b=bDve5hL/; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=ZzgI/jQ8 Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YD3jvRODhruM for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 15:36:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7099126DFB for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 15:36:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FA0420B19 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 18:36:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 14 Feb 2018 18:36:30 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= derechosdigitales.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=CDJFAN FOq0GqkGBrwMgpJi3cTX1xlnSE4S0mInCOVyc=; b=bDve5hL/OA0x4T7mMgi5jM +Px33uDmzwxy31iiGs09+d2wJmXPIRBuAm0pl+hMVV18Ok71RQbkzF+nuRicv4JA Avh91S3lp8/Sl5CrM3oCKYEnnrZbo6Cd08qq11yE/4QNGawjV+QnCnwOFB/1Yu7j n3XhU8tfITH+wk3XewZvhAD49MvafGhgU+3F4KhizoK6yL/SIcH2QVEWTbfRZPmC h7v5rC9hma6ckVJl/R0f39n2prCJRdvw6Idr7550ilwuTRgDvG5Lk5VKbeLieVUK 4G0kEKAFGcpHPLY4MS970FTRISkcFB820uzuM/GtA0DeSEWzMDXYbbFcbFGePjWw == DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=CDJFAN FOq0GqkGBrwMgpJi3cTX1xlnSE4S0mInCOVyc=; b=ZzgI/jQ8RiwAqKeJlzsuTb xH7tC63BACwvoQO14VmZNzu3X8KeyuRGVkHlBRtGu6zB0OQ8XgEtmYSLiMK7usYk /8sWTdPQQANkSIIbODBIfG55EdQYX73S8AIAJv72hkvpB36BHoNiDDHVUIcShzjk ud26xAsAq0q9hq+Mjts41m89zL/1fsP2DJJ3gAoNBy3GIiLKCceSfy9HmqDArIaG FkYizMvuMEkXhOdPl6Y+xHsOSP6ZzcV6nAg7ZU1zMvSZmACqiWGiWDaSjFBoekzP JurOcjtT3yo+NCdxsFXvs0Y5CTsD+LlPhxn6Khz1E7VqFtdNjXEe4CU84P/fnA/Q == X-ME-Sender: Received: from Giselas-MacBook-Air-6.local (unknown [189.208.151.91]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id C0C0D24640 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 18:36:29 -0500 (EST) To: hrpc@irtf.org References: <21d44e51-ed5a-08ac-ab8e-712235e3c8bc@acm.org> <127d8627-ad2a-f7d2-c385-956999f0a9fd@derechosdigitales.org> <20180123105207.GE28814@mir> <20180124124125.GE4995@mir> <20180124194548.GA13745@anvilwalrusden.com> <20180206132056.GI26829@mir> <20180207053052.GA1834@mx4.yitter.info> From: Gisela Perez de Acha Message-ID: <1231ee96-4d04-2767-b5b4-652ad15b6011@derechosdigitales.org> Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:36:28 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180207053052.GA1834@mx4.yitter.info> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: es-ES Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Freedom of Association on the Internet X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 23:36:33 -0000 Hey Andrew, I have two points to make (before I get more confused): >>> In the meat-world, your freedom of association does not extend so far >>> as to require me to associate with you: it's a negative, not a >>> positive, right. >> >> Gisela already adressed the problems with positive and negative rights, so I won't repeat the issues here. >> > Well, to be fair, my reading of Gisela's response was "this isn't > academically fashionable right now, so you're wrong," but here's what > she actually said: > >> the division between positive/negative rights has been left behind >> for almost a decade now in human rights law theory and practice. >> Traditionally, civil and political rights were deemed as "negative >> obligations" for the State (mainly respecting, not interfering) >> whereas economical, social and cultural rights were "positive >> obligations" (fostering, paying, etc). Now we understand that >> freedom of expression should be respected by states, but also >> fostered in positive ways. 1) Well, to be fair, your reading is wrong. Let me expand. National and international courts, as well as broad international consensus between countries (the basis of international law itself) have left behind the distinction between positive and negative rights for about 25 years now. So rather than about "fashion" or "trends" it's about rules. In fact, all rights bear similar features but were thought to have a different nature when both the ICCPR and the ICESCR were drafted. a) On one hand, "negative rights" were seen as clasical liberal freedoms which embody negative duties of the state; a set of prohibitions for the government; a doit être expressed as a "passive" attitude of respect towards them: freedom of speech, the right to a fair trial, freedom of religion, assembly and association indeed, and voting rights. These rights mostly stem from the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights that identified them as rights which every human being should enjoy just because of their human nature. They were mostly encoded in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) in 1966 which was conceived as a body of rules of hard and fast law, to be implemented without any delay. b) On the other hand "positive rights" were seen as actions that must be taken to allow for the fullfilment of certain other set of rights including labour rights and the right to health, the right to education, water and the right to an adequate standard of living. These are mostly encoded in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) which was rather viewed as an instrument enunciating promotional obligations, to be implemented progressively, step by step. c) Human rights bodies at international level have evolved a doctrine according to which it is not enough for a state to abstain from interfering with the rights it has pledged to respect and observe. In 1993 the Vienna Declaration of the World Conference on Human Rights affirmed that ‘[a]ll human rights are universal, indivisible and interdependent and interrelated [http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/Vienna.aspx]. Then again at the Millennium Declaration of 8 September 2000 [http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration/ares552e.htm] the heads of state and government pledged to ‘strive for the full protection and promotion in all our countries of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights for all, and the same language was repeated in the World Summit Outcome of 2005. In other words, the tendency in the international rights arena is to "promote, protect, respect and fulfill" all rights equally [See here http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/InternationalLaw.aspx]. Judges follow this tendency, the will of states, and eventually this idea has bought a place in nacional and international jurisprudence. d) Let's think of an example. Classical so-called "negative rights", like free speech or freedom of religion, presuppose the protective machinery of the state –e.g. actions from the police, judiciary system or certain public policies that requiere the spenditure of money. In other words, a government can never lean back, remaining entirely passive: just in order to maintain law and order, a considerable effort is necessary, expenditure both in financial and human terms. The same happens with classical "positive rights": the right to health must not only be positively fostered, but also respected in a non-regresive fashion. (There's tons of bibliography on the topic, if anyone is interested in going further) > I still don't understand how any of that responds to the main point I > was making. The draft as it stands appears to me to conjure into > being the requirement that any given AS -- or maybe only some ASes, I > am not sure -- MUST route the packets of (some?) other ASes as a > matter of the right of association. This strikes me as the sort of > massive elevation of political preference to "a right" that underpins > Bentham's original description of natural rights. I simply do not see > how anything in the Internet architecutre allows someone to insist on > the right of free packet passage. I really _want_ that passage, and > think it is an unalloyed good thing. But I do not see why (and the > draft provides, as far as I can tell, zero argument for why) this is a > "right" as opposed to the collectively self-interested way by which > everyone gets a global Internet. 2) I think you are mixing concepts. In the draft we say "In international law, the right to freedom of assembly and association protects any collective, gathered either permanently or temporarily for "peaceful" purposes. We will later expand on the definitions and limits of "peacefulness" within these rights. For now it is important to underline the propery of "freedom" because the right to freedom of association and assembly is voluntary and uncoerced: anyone can join or leave a group of choice, which in turn means on should not be forced to either join, stay or leave." Forced association is prohibited because it's a freedom, but that has nothing to do with positive or negative rights. Plus, we are already working on the new draft to address the issues os public/private properties and obligations between ASes and internet(s). Hope this helped clarify a bit more Cheers, Gisela From nobody Wed Feb 14 16:28:01 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC65D126CF9 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 16:27:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.21 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JGdYncHpzOJc for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 16:27:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.amsl.com (c8a.amsl.com [4.31.198.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4029B127735 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 16:27:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 885161CAE4F for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 16:27:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-it0-f53.google.com (mail-it0-f53.google.com [209.85.214.53]) by c8a.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 64F961CAE3D for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 16:27:26 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-it0-f53.google.com with SMTP id 193so14494540iti.1 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 16:27:58 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPCatoJXC55TrTgT9KPnFLbTBsmuyP/w62r/53nCo3ekJT3uX+ma qDHxWHCBUNFQBAI0tNlK9rOtElMonTaqK7bimHQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x226NYZ5y27PBIK7aiofIfVU3JWXy9SddiufbI4egf7YJzIIGAiwPGy5T5sedWaql6x3+eFl2pGMTL3S18o1KD7Q= X-Received: by 10.36.132.76 with SMTP id h73mr1148187itd.110.1518654477569; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 16:27:57 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.2.1.68 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 16:27:37 -0800 (PST) From: Glen Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 16:27:37 -0800 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: To: hrpc@irtf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113b9308ac13590565354cc0" Archived-At: Subject: [hrpc] Possible missed messages on this list X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 00:28:00 -0000 --001a113b9308ac13590565354cc0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Possible missed messages on this list Dear list participants - An upgrade to the IETF's custom mail processing software today resulted in some delivery failures for *some* messages to *some* recipients on this list, over the past 3 hours. We invite you to check the mail archives for this list, at: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_list=hrpc to ensure that you have received all the relevant messages for this list today. We apologize for the inconvenience. Glen -- Glen Barney IT Director AMS (IETF Secretariat) --001a113b9308ac13590565354cc0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Possible missed messages on this list

Dear list participants -
An upgrade to the IETF's custom mail processing software today resulted i= n some delivery failures for *some* messages to *some* recipients on this list, over the past 3 hours.

We invite you to check the mail archiv= es for this list, at:

https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_l= ist=3Dhrpc

to ensure that you have received all the relevant mes= sages for this list today.

We apologize for the inconvenience.
Glen
--
Glen Barney
IT Director
AMS (IETF Secretariat)





--001a113b9308ac13590565354cc0-- From nobody Wed Feb 14 18:13:01 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6455126CD6 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 18:12:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yitter.info header.b=TnE8C7qc; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yitter.info header.b=TiJEqN3T Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vsbHsLRicNBe for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 18:12:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.yitter.info (mx4.yitter.info [159.203.56.111]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C4E2126C3D for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 18:12:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEFB9BD33A for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2018 02:12:56 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1518660776; bh=3lxR94+QBwKHF6zyCCVfTYIj/xW0ehNA1LIVFL8E3o0=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=TnE8C7qcuiwT7/+6lIxsrDxF5Riy+l2ZoqjcNSBC3GTptRer9zrYkSbIJDVddwyI+ t/VpDuDL7Q5pzQJ5qFMe7IRLS2OEl/neQuhDwRCdUaDiVHuviE8lOQ5+yhVyroW/16 X66lY0HXRHzYioyDbz6pwg0uz+Jh+lvGcs8vTeLw= X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at crankycanuck.ca Received: from mx4.yitter.info ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx4.yitter.info [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EcJmqRKtMD7i for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2018 02:12:55 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 21:12:52 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1518660775; bh=3lxR94+QBwKHF6zyCCVfTYIj/xW0ehNA1LIVFL8E3o0=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=TiJEqN3T2xBvBhfAUx3dcxxhmoaYHocQiQiVb7SfkuvpGR5z+d0SbjgPuY9MNGcJa NXb60guzydS34oLiFbPkrPoieGnva7avcia8a5uatUwPQktMzKn/YBUDV36skFqZUG twiqG8rkZktclFusgtOScWNHUJZ6CQg6gWGCFOPk= From: Andrew Sullivan To: hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <20180215021252.a6af62liml5oyrec@mx4.yitter.info> References: <21d44e51-ed5a-08ac-ab8e-712235e3c8bc@acm.org> <127d8627-ad2a-f7d2-c385-956999f0a9fd@derechosdigitales.org> <20180123105207.GE28814@mir> <20180124124125.GE4995@mir> <20180124194548.GA13745@anvilwalrusden.com> <20180206132056.GI26829@mir> <20180207053052.GA1834@mx4.yitter.info> <1231ee96-4d04-2767-b5b4-652ad15b6011@derechosdigitales.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1231ee96-4d04-2767-b5b4-652ad15b6011@derechosdigitales.org> Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Freedom of Association on the Internet X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 02:13:00 -0000 Hi, On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 05:36:28PM -0600, Gisela Perez de Acha wrote: > > 1) Well, to be fair, your reading is wrong. That is probably not even the first time that day I was wrong, so I'm not too surpised. I do understand the ways that a distinction between positive and negative rights is problematic when the distinction is applied to government action. And as you note, the literature around rights is mostly about what governments may, must, and may not do. But the point I was trying to make (on which more below) is that the rights-based defence of the Internet on the basis of assembly is creating a positive obligation that can only operate on almost entirely private entities. This seems like a big step. So, the point isn't positive and negative rights -- I really don't care how we qualify this -- but rather that the architecture of the Internet makes any right to freedom of association into a constraint on a right of _dis_association. > 2) I think you are mixing concepts. In the draft we say I don't see how. > Forced association is prohibited because it's a freedom, but that has > nothing to do with positive or negative rights. Plus, we are already > working on the new draft to address the issues os public/private > properties and obligations between ASes and internet(s). The problem as I see it, however, is that the Internet is not, as I keep pointing out, a single space. It is a collection of networks each of which operates under its own rules. Since, as you point out, there can be no forced association because of association being a freedom, then it cannot possibly be the case that I can be forced to carry the traffic of someone on my network. But if my network is a critical path between two people who want to associate on the Internet, then their right of freedom of association and my right not to associate with one of them are necessarily in conflict. In this case, I don't actually see what it gains us to claim that there is a right to associate freely on the Internet, since as a practical matter such a right is _always_ in conflict with the right of someone else not to so associate. So either this claim of a right is empty, or else it imbalances the scale towards individuals' rights to associate with one another at the expense of private operators' rights not to so participate. Now, maybe your point is merely that there is an interesting academic question of whether there is this right, and then the question of how to balance that right against the other private rights of network operators. But if that's the point, it's by no means clear to me in the draft. Best regards, A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com From nobody Fri Feb 16 03:11:41 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5D82126CC4 for ; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 03:11:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tvHlij-hD7vV for ; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 03:11:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8ACAC1201F8 for ; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 03:11:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1emdvS-00031A-U1 for hrpc@irtf.org; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 12:11:35 +0100 To: "hrpc@irtf.org" From: Niels ten Oever Message-ID: Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 12:11:34 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Authenticated-As-Hash: f1842a279235a42f6aa2a2a81130733515c5a4ec X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Scan-Signature: 4b95630a2805109a2fafe329e7ec4fd6 Archived-At: Subject: [hrpc] discuss draft-tenoever-hrpc-anonymity-02 X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 11:11:40 -0000 Thanks a lot for the progress on draft-tenoever-hrpc-anonymity-02 Stephane. I think the links to the GDPR are also quite apt! One question: Pseudonymity Derived from pseudonym, a persistent identity which is not the same as the entity's given (or official) name. For all IETF protocols, pseudonimity is a given: protocols don't care whether the identity is an official one or not. Even if the protocol allows to use ifficial identities (for instance in the From: header of an Internet email), it dos not require it. But it should be noted that, if the user cannot create new pseudonyms easily, pseudonyms suffer from linkability. Unlikability depends on this ability to create new pseudonyms gratis and at will (good examples are SSH keys or Bitcoin addresses). Even when a user can create new pseudonyms easily, persistent pseudonyms still suffer from linkability, right? And some suggestions for some more use cases: 4.3 Selective use A user might want to retain their anonymity to certain actors / protocols, but identified to others 4.4 Dynamic use A user might want to keep the persistence of their anonymous or pseudonymous to an absolute minimum timespan 4.5 User analysis A user might want to understood which other actors might (potentially) have which level of information about them. Nits: - ifficial identities = probably official identities. But not sure what these are, do you mean names as registered on a passport? - dos = does ? - Unlikability = unlinkability ? - causes = cases ? Happy to discuss! Niels From nobody Fri Feb 16 05:51:35 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4029C12AF83 for ; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 05:51:33 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3435S3ZxSM0l for ; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 05:51:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5109C1273B1 for ; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 05:51:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1emgQC-0006Q1-91 for hrpc@irtf.org; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 14:51:28 +0100 To: hrpc@irtf.org References: <02e0869e-c056-1c97-5242-b6004b1ca197@cs.tcd.ie> <42ba3afc-5caf-1d2e-2fe8-f9f1cf92eeef@derechosdigitales.org> <20171128181604.cszih4nbzuoz23sj@mx4.yitter.info> <20171203234742.E9415124BE8@ietfa.amsl.com> <0f1626eb-576b-6647-00eb-06b30818f938@article19.org> <6249C479-295B-4D00-B66F-BB6F358C10C8@gmail.com> From: Niels ten Oever Message-ID: Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 14:51:27 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <6249C479-295B-4D00-B66F-BB6F358C10C8@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="O77fuZjE9evTGDzX8Pl6dhCgcUIRGXKFK" X-Authenticated-As-Hash: f1842a279235a42f6aa2a2a81130733515c5a4ec X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Scan-Signature: e968ccc4f7443f294d42e1d16aba6e24 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] draft-tenoever-hrpc-association-02 X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 13:51:33 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --O77fuZjE9evTGDzX8Pl6dhCgcUIRGXKFK Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="XZ0wMegBNsAQZlSbzfko8Ht5eLJBzfT2k"; protected-headers="v1" From: Niels ten Oever To: hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: Subject: Re: [hrpc] draft-tenoever-hrpc-association-02 References: <02e0869e-c056-1c97-5242-b6004b1ca197@cs.tcd.ie> <42ba3afc-5caf-1d2e-2fe8-f9f1cf92eeef@derechosdigitales.org> <20171128181604.cszih4nbzuoz23sj@mx4.yitter.info> <20171203234742.E9415124BE8@ietfa.amsl.com> <0f1626eb-576b-6647-00eb-06b30818f938@article19.org> <6249C479-295B-4D00-B66F-BB6F358C10C8@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <6249C479-295B-4D00-B66F-BB6F358C10C8@gmail.com> --XZ0wMegBNsAQZlSbzfko8Ht5eLJBzfT2k Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Fred, Thanks for this. I took me a while to chew on this. I actually liked your example where several definitions of the Internet were possible, that next to each other, expose the different things one can think of a network. The most technical is probably something like: Internet : The Network of networks, that consists of Autonomous Systems that are connected through the Internet Protocol (IP). Less technical reductionist definitions will probably look like: : A persistent socio-technical system over which services are delivered : A techno-social assemblage of devices, users, sensors, networks, routers, governance, administrators, operators and protocols. Whereas I initially thought it might be better to push for one definition I now think we can actually use this vocabulary ambiguity to bring the different understandings of the Internet to the forefront, because this might be at the core of many contemporary Internet discussio= ns. Best, Niels On 02/06/2018 10:09 PM, Fred Baker wrote: > I won't say that Jeffsey is wrong, but I will say that he has given one= of several possible definitions. He's not particularly *right*. >=20 > Personally, I would look back to the documents written by the early Int= ernet pioneers and their use of the term. These would include early RFCs,= INWG documents, and so on. http://alexmckenzie.weebly.com/inwg-and-the-c= onception-of-the-internet-an-eyewitness-account.html is an interesting ar= ticle in context, as is RFC 675, which is the first RFC that I find using= the term. >=20 > What I find is that the term was used without a formal definition, but = in every early context in which I find it, it is the domain in which an I= nternet Protocol packet might wander. RFC 675 is an early definition of w= hat today we call TCP, and is used between the endpoints of such sessions= =2E The other word that is used in that context is "internetwork", used a= s an adjective and as a verb ("internetworking"). >=20 > For clarity, a contrast needs to be drawn with the word "catenet", whic= h was used in the same timeframe to refer to "concatenated networks". An = example of this is the Network-to-Network-Interface (NNI) definition from= the ITU specifying a data circuit composed of a sequence of Frame Relay = DLCs and ATM VCs; one sets up an end to end circuit composed of a random = set of those, and whenever the circuit sees to change protocols, there is= a defined algorithm for the translation. It's Y.1417, IIRC. One can set = up a circuit, and transfer data from end to end using that circuit, witho= ut knowing the set of companies or technologies the path traverses, and d= ata can travel end to end without being bumped up to a higher layer such = as the Internet Protocol. That was a common view of networking in the 197= 0s, and even into the 1980s and 1990s in some technologies and SDOs; I he= ard it most recently in the SGIP context, where some wanted to implement = gateways at the edges of every Smart Grid network to translate to the nex= t. >=20 > The Internet is not a catenet - it is not a concatenated set of link la= yer technologies. Rather, each network implements whatever it likes, whic= h might be an IP network, some random overlay, Ethernet here, Token Ring = there, and MPLS somewhere else, or whatever else, and presents an IP-to-I= P interface at its interconnects to other networks. There is no circuit, = and no call setup. Rather, some device somewhere sends a packet, it wande= rs in whatever way it wanders, and it arrives somewhere else - the two pl= aces being specified by the source and destination addresses in the packe= t. The way the term was used by those that invented it (and failed to for= mally define it) was a set of networks that operated in some respects as = a single larger network, a network of networks, using one addressing syst= em and one internetworking protocol end to end. >=20 > To repeat: The Internet is a network of networks interconnected using t= he Internet Protocol. >=20 > Feeding exactly that sentence into Google, I come up with a number of i= nteresting articles. One you could refer to, if you like, is https://www.= igi-global.com/dictionary/internet/15369. It lists 93 different definitio= ns, mostly taking the next higher view of the network that I have also of= ten found people using. Definition 89 has it referring to the network tha= t connects computers: "Internet is an electronic network connecting billi= ons of computers globally", while definition 92 has it being the computer= s that are interconnected by networks: "Network of networks of computers"= =2E >=20 > I would actually push back pretty hard on the concept that the Internet= is fundamentally a set of people, if only because many important points = on the Internet are not people. Consider, if you will, the Internet of Th= ings; it is comprised of a set of services of various kinds that communic= ate in various ways with a variety of sensors and actuators - telemetry d= evices and things that might be controlled after evaluation of those inpu= ts in the context of some policy. There are people that are ultimately se= rved by it and people that care about its operation, but as far as IOT it= self is concerned, there is no human in the loop. That's why it's called = the Internet of THINGS, in comparison to the Internet used by PEOPLE. Con= sider also the number of services in the network that are involved with e= ven the simplest things a human user does - if I'm curious how many peopl= e live in Thailand, for example, I turn on tcpdump, open a browser, type = "how many people live in Thailand", close tcpdump, and discover that I ha= ve captured 7149 messages exchanged with 44 peers in 46 identifiable sess= ions. I'll send you the file if you're interested. As far as I, the human= , was concerned, I asked one question of one party - Google. You don't ev= en want to think about how many entities were involved in the discussion.= >=20 > If I'm talking about the Internet and what it is, I'd stick to the Inte= rnet itself, as opposed to what fits my predisposition... >=20 >> On Feb 6, 2018, at 8:25 AM, Niels ten Oever wrot= e: >> >> >> On 12/04/2017 12:47 AM, Jefsey wrote: >>> Gaines' one : "we [the users] are the internet". >> >> Do you have a source for that by any chance? I would like to add it to= >> the glossary as one of the definitions. >> >> Thanks! >> >> Niels >> >> _______________________________________________ >> hrpc mailing list >> hrpc@irtf.org >> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > hrpc mailing list > hrpc@irtf.org > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc >=20 --XZ0wMegBNsAQZlSbzfko8Ht5eLJBzfT2k-- --O77fuZjE9evTGDzX8Pl6dhCgcUIRGXKFK Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEJFgLcFxK/YqUiGQ6Dtg/OkaKyLMFAlqG4d8ACgkQDtg/OkaK yLOr9w//ThgUGLWe1F7fq/FwpJExkF+ud8+BSTu8e3qJns2irrqaqP/JzdW/7x4w OwMpjkpaWF6Ns2oed2YMcSLdH7nHb2IBox3LKuFcsC5NZRt+CMwnS1J2BHJcpAZX cNsYrJllrZ3LJ0M2JzZLiadBR8xrlUdbPYTBoNcpMgVr1GBdTu3zXa9Cj7Vz/Vs1 i3zDpkkOE7ksiA0hHy+Gvgr0W/XgrS36vFKEncCbVUHlE2Z3I5F8vS1zOBPj7d3V gUcO7Hg96lXBGTUaKbvu7GT5TEWIxaXYs6RzLNCqgm0YUNruu0SiaftA+edrLHnZ dUx227WTspQUd//k2uch63/OX9bqX0nBr1kXx+PWXk5rBELBZBIvBQasYwm0IY09 /EoBOHJ1ykpF+iQMAEijmQuWDVl3Eez1aKtxCppz9EWVXWY3gne0rlRiImeouZiH 8Ll3qg71fRq997zou+MuFjsqJDQi5P4cGdzlq/2tumcb6H6UQTV7wLaJi7RlQ78D bxXekFPsd6ff9h9Y1yevcMysKa9EdcSF0YM5H/QRwkbZPru15oaEA5J5Ru17ye2l EuytGyHd4yT/4t8YxMrno26maTBX7NPD0DRL8cHXKeRFh2yn6hpOjbv7fkx+PGoi YWFm81/IronSEvb2VQfFKWIxyHln87ODyoJntW64ZT2dZHnYkgI= =Nk0j -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --O77fuZjE9evTGDzX8Pl6dhCgcUIRGXKFK-- From nobody Fri Feb 16 07:23:01 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 254F5126579 for ; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 07:22:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id y-NPIvN9X9at for ; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 07:22:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.nic.fr (mx4.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:2::4:12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25FCB124BFA for ; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 07:22:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 5A4A328018C; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 16:22:54 +0100 (CET) Received: by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 500) id 5458D2801A6; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 16:22:54 +0100 (CET) Received: from relay01.prive.nic.fr (relay01.prive.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:15::11]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D81228018C; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 16:22:54 +0100 (CET) Received: from b12.nic.fr (b12.users.prive.nic.fr [10.10.86.133]) by relay01.prive.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49BF8642BE40; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 16:22:54 +0100 (CET) Received: by b12.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4018541505; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 16:22:54 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 16:22:54 +0100 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Niels ten Oever Cc: "hrpc@irtf.org" Message-ID: <20180216152254.4ozwqrojcfycec7h@nic.fr> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 9.3 X-Kernel: Linux 4.9.0-5-amd64 x86_64 X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie Organization: NIC France X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/ User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000251, version=1.2.2 X-PMX-Version: 6.0.0.2142326, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2018.2.16.151517 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] discuss draft-tenoever-hrpc-anonymity-02 X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 15:22:59 -0000 On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 12:11:34PM +0100, Niels ten Oever wrote a message of 55 lines which said: > Even when a user can create new pseudonyms easily, persistent pseudonyms > still suffer from linkability, right? Yes but the idea is that, if you have easily-creatable pseudonyms, you can use a fresh one for each operation, thus defeating linkability (for instance, this is the recommended procedure for Bitcoin, see the EFF donation site for instance). > 4.3 Selective use OK > 4.4 Dynamic use > > A user might want to keep the persistence of their anonymous or > pseudonymous to an absolute minimum timespan Not clear to me. Explanations? > 4.5 User analysis > > A user might want to understood which other actors might (potentially) > have which level of information about them. Hmmm, it seems an use case for identification, not for anonymity? ("OK, Google, I want to know everything you know about me") > Nits: > - ifficial identities = probably official identities. But not sure what > these are, do you mean names as registered on a passport? Added in the terminology section. > - dos = does ? Fixed > - Unlikability = unlinkability ? No, it means I don't like it :-) > - causes = cases ? The sentence could be clearer, but it was supposed to be causes. Commit at: https://github.com/nllz/IRTF-HRPC/commit/80eaa68a1ba5fac9f89ef46af2f4a0016ef0cd30 From nobody Fri Feb 16 12:51:04 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6B6312946D for ; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 12:51:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qeaxAB5daUTG for ; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 12:51:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 565D8126BF0 for ; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 12:50:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1emmy9-00087O-S3 for hrpc@irtf.org; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 21:50:58 +0100 References: <151881369394.1357.13591123164657807200.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> To: "hrpc@irtf.org" From: Niels ten Oever X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <151881369394.1357.13591123164657807200.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Message-ID: <70d3cdab-f7ee-3784-d031-1bd287a9ec82@nielstenoever.net> Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 21:50:57 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <151881369394.1357.13591123164657807200.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Authenticated-As-Hash: f1842a279235a42f6aa2a2a81130733515c5a4ec X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Scan-Signature: f0d5e446bfc5bbd6ce781899a390d841 Archived-At: Subject: [hrpc] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-tenoever-hrpc-association-03.txt X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 20:51:03 -0000 Hi all, Gisela and I are very happy to share a new version of the association draft with you. We have added quite a bit of new text, many pieces based on discussions here on the list and your contributions. We have also tossed the DDoS, spam, echo-chamber part, since we did not add anything useful about DDoS or spam which has not already been said in other RFCs, and online echo-chambers actually don't seem to be so bad. We're greatly looking forward to your comments - maybe we can make a new version before IETF101. All the best, Niels * http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1369118X.2018.1428656?journalCode=rics20#.WnHNzhqT4Fw.twitter -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: New Version Notification for draft-tenoever-hrpc-association-03.txt Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 12:41:33 -0800 From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Niels ten Oever , Gisela de Acha , Gisela Perez de Acha A new version of I-D, draft-tenoever-hrpc-association-03.txt has been successfully submitted by Niels ten Oever and posted to the IETF repository. Name: draft-tenoever-hrpc-association Revision: 03 Title: Freedom of Association on the Internet Document date: 2018-02-16 Group: Individual Submission Pages: 23 URL: https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-tenoever-hrpc-association-03.txt Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-tenoever-hrpc-association/ Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tenoever-hrpc-association-03 Htmlized: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-tenoever-hrpc-association-03 Diff: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-tenoever-hrpc-association-03 Abstract: This document scopes the relation between Internet protocols and the right to freedom of assembly and association. Increasingly, the Internet mediates our lives, our relationships and our ability to excercise our human rights. The Internet provides a global public space, but one that is built on private infrastructure. Since Internet protocols play a central role in the management, development and use of the Internet, the relation between protocols and the aforementioned rights should be documented and any adverse impacts of this relation should be mitigated. Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. The IETF Secretariat From nobody Mon Feb 19 09:24:33 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7F7E129502 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2018 09:24:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EkcHjjvH4Y3N for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2018 09:24:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33C401243F6 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2018 09:24:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1enpAv-0007GI-5k; Mon, 19 Feb 2018 18:24:25 +0100 To: Stephane Bortzmeyer Cc: "hrpc@irtf.org" References: <20180216152254.4ozwqrojcfycec7h@nic.fr> From: Niels ten Oever Message-ID: <9505209c-162e-db93-8a8f-171a9969f074@nielstenoever.net> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2018 18:24:23 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180216152254.4ozwqrojcfycec7h@nic.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authenticated-As-Hash: f1842a279235a42f6aa2a2a81130733515c5a4ec X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Scan-Signature: 4868b52b90b9144be14ceb212c82ef23 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] discuss draft-tenoever-hrpc-anonymity-02 X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2018 17:24:31 -0000 On 02/16/2018 04:22 PM, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 12:11:34PM +0100, > Niels ten Oever wrote > a message of 55 lines which said: > >> Even when a user can create new pseudonyms easily, persistent pseudonyms >> still suffer from linkability, right? > > Yes but the idea is that, if you have easily-creatable pseudonyms, you > can use a fresh one for each operation, thus defeating linkability > (for instance, this is the recommended procedure for Bitcoin, see the > EFF donation site for instance). > Yes, but there are maybe other ways to isolate pseudonyms, rights? This seems to involve user-choice, which in general is good, but maybe should not be the default in this case? >> 4.3 Selective use > > OK > >> 4.4 Dynamic use >> >> A user might want to keep the persistence of their anonymous or >> pseudonymous to an absolute minimum timespan > > Not clear to me. Explanations? > The longer an anonymous identity is kept, the higher the risk it is linked to an identity, right? >> 4.5 User analysis >> >> A user might want to understood which other actors might (potentially) >> have which level of information about them. > > Hmmm, it seems an use case for identification, not for anonymity? > ("OK, Google, I want to know everything you know about me") > Or an opportunity for inventarization, threat modeling and informed decision making by the data subject. >> Nits: >> - ifficial identities = probably official identities. But not sure what >> these are, do you mean names as registered on a passport? > > Added in the terminology section. > >> - dos = does ? > > Fixed > >> - Unlikability = unlinkability ? > > No, it means I don't like it :-) > >> - causes = cases ? > > The sentence could be clearer, but it was supposed to be causes. > > Commit at: > > https://github.com/nllz/IRTF-HRPC/commit/80eaa68a1ba5fac9f89ef46af2f4a0016ef0cd30 > From nobody Mon Feb 19 14:37:53 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC173126CC4 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2018 14:37:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.255 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.255 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yOtAeebOD_d2 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2018 14:37:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtprelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0056.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A4B85126DCA for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2018 14:37:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (clb03-v110.bra.tucows.net [216.40.38.60]) by smtprelay07.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7530F181D341E for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2018 22:37:50 +0000 (UTC) X-Session-Marker: 6176726940646F7269612E6F7267 X-Spam-Summary: 2, 0, 0, , d41d8cd98f00b204, avri@acm.org, :, RULES_HIT:41:152:355:379:854:966:973:988:989:1260:1261:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1381:1437:1513:1515:1516:1518:1521:1534:1541:1593:1594:1711:1730:1747:1777:1792:2196:2199:2393:2559:2562:2693:2736:2737:2741:2898:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3353:3865:3866:3867:3868:3870:3871:3872:3874:4184:4250:4362:4385:5007:7652:7901:7903:9010:10004:10400:10848:11658:11914:12663:13069:13071:13161:13229:13311:13357:14180:14777:21060:21063:21080:21433:21627:21740:30022:30046:30054:30070, 0, RBL:72.221.122.28:@acm.org:.lbl8.mailshell.net-62.22.0.100 64.201.201.201, CacheIP:none, Bayesian:0.5, 0.5, 0.5, Netcheck:none, DomainCache:0, MSF:not bulk, SPF:fs, MSBL:0, DNSBL:neutral, Custom_rules:0:0:0, LFtime:20, LUA_SUMMARY:none X-HE-Tag: music20_7e9b514e70223 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2132 Received: from [192.168.0.7] (ip72-221-122-28.ri.ri.cox.net [72.221.122.28]) (Authenticated sender: avri@doria.org) by omf01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2018 22:37:49 +0000 (UTC) Reply-To: avri@acm.org To: hrpc@irtf.org From: avri doria Message-ID: <3eadd76e-f2ab-ae31-0a22-50392759217e@acm.org> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2018 17:37:47 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Language: en-US X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 180219-6, 02/19/2018), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Archived-At: Subject: [hrpc] Draft to RG draft polling X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2018 22:37:53 -0000 Hi, Finally did the comparison of the responses on the drafts. Not too many of them so it was possibly an unsuccessful experiment. Kept hoping more people would respond. And two people, one on list and one off, questioned the use of such an IETF like process for the RG documents. In any case, it seems to me that there is no objection to the Guidelines or the Anonymity draft becoming Research Group Drafts. While not exactly stated as objection to becoming a RG drafts, there was a lot of discussion on some of the major assertions of the Freedom of Association draft. I took that to mean it is not ready for RG status. I see there is a new draft, so will be curious to see how that deals with the questions and the support level. This does seem to provoke a good discussion on the nature of the Internet and Association so I hope work continues on it. On Politics of Standards there seems to be direct objection to it becoming a RG document at this time. Was reminded that Unrequested was retired and it seems that Implementation of 451 was going to continue as an individual draft for the present, at least. Did anyone read the responses differently from=C2=A0 me? thanks avri (btw, i have missed seeing some of my email to the group, not sure if it is getting through or if it fell in the delivery hole people spoke of) From nobody Tue Feb 20 03:09:02 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 799EF1270B4 for ; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 03:09:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vCZ_iB9MIEdl for ; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 03:08:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 161EE1200FC for ; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 03:08:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eo5n5-0000Ot-DK for hrpc@irtf.org; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 12:08:55 +0100 To: hrpc@irtf.org References: <4046d2b3-2f9b-0aeb-c23d-b0454249ac85@nielstenoever.net> From: Mallory Knodel Message-ID: <0538bb42-b677-7162-d0f6-932de3b0025d@article19.org> Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2018 14:08:52 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4046d2b3-2f9b-0aeb-c23d-b0454249ac85@nielstenoever.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Scan-Signature: ee739817b6cd2655ac6326818c89325b Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Drafts and IETF 101 session X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2018 11:09:00 -0000 Hi, I support the idea of brining in a speaker on STS. Luca Belli's work seems like a good fit. Maybe folks have other suggestions. I imagine that this takes some organising so good to make a decision and move forward with it soonest. -Mallory On 13/02/18 15:21, Niels ten Oever wrote: > Hi Avri, >=20 > On 02/12/2018 08:11 PM, avri doria wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I am working on the summary of the comments on the RG drafts and shoul= d >> have it in a day or so. So anyone who wants to get a comment in still >> has time. >> >> With the IETF RG meeting coming up in a month or so, would like to fin= d >> out who has something they want to discuss or otherwise see on the age= nda. >> >> >From my last request: >> >>> Also time to collect ideas for the upcoming HRPC meeting.=C2=A0 >>> >>> In addition to the continuing discussion of what next, what else woul= d >>> people like to see? >>> >>> - Who has something they want to speak about - a draft or some other = paper >=20 > We have been discussing about Science and Technology studies a lot, so > maybe an introduction to that field of studies could be interesting. >=20 > Next to that we're working hard on a new version of > draft-tenoever-hrpc-association, and I expect we'll also have a new > version of draft-tenoever-hrpc-political. >=20 >>> >>> - Do we want to invite a speaker. >>> >=20 > An (intro to) STS lecturer might be nice/interesting. >=20 > My attention was also caught by the recent work of Luca Belli who coine= d > the term 'the right to network self-determination' (cf > https://www.opendemocracy.net/luca-belli/scramble-for-data-and-need-for= -network-self-determination > ) >=20 >>> - Also plan to include discussion of updated drafts and any new draft= s. >>> Which should we expect? >> >=20 > As said: > draft-tenoever-hrpc-association and draft-tenoever-hrpc-political >=20 > Best, >=20 > Niels >=20 >> >> Thanks >> >> avri >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> hrpc mailing list >> hrpc@irtf.org >> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc >> >=20 > _______________________________________________ > hrpc mailing list > hrpc@irtf.org > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc >=20 --=20 Mallory Knodel Head of Digital :: article19.org gpg fingerprint :: E3EB 63E0 65A3 B240 BCD9 B071 0C32 A271 BD3C C780 From nobody Tue Feb 20 03:11:18 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90A84129515 for ; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 03:11:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fBrAWtkBCeqo for ; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 03:11:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wr0-x22b.google.com (mail-wr0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8EC17127241 for ; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 03:11:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id s5so13214736wra.0 for ; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 03:11:04 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=Q7vk4buZTsI+nPwPS+OjhS0rIvU70urPpI+xj8OZvn0=; b=tOqBX7fEJT26MXa/yZvFlUwRSssy365XPkxtMHgrzK5ZxYqXvmfS000lCD3peS3aOm xciF9+dWxicy3QH8DT8Ns1Uvn3+6u2xYVVC/sIQkJniXSKFmgfMMmCO13Ja5uZBzeix6 0NvNNfH2GVBYm0cRoozDCKQi2qXatf1MEpDHR1XsGvZvvpZ9yet+4HYMHjL7H0KWtYGa ZSRWQQeOYIfT/7obJE6nKL5+Hk0N1beWf7ez9aAYvx+KoOXLzppVH5dVsha2NDlyy7Nt ccxq40iDZJNIo8uB/bb8xtxlBaDmTqUlELXg60/3gGD0Qv7iNhvg4YQvnm4YCvqH+d5N hWFg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Q7vk4buZTsI+nPwPS+OjhS0rIvU70urPpI+xj8OZvn0=; b=HUYGjViyz4ZoLhDoRUqw1rTw6u0ORJ5VgPiwVEXRK1/OfigHqUpSjb//OspX6DdcPB pMOZdY/GD1aAd0j/qDcFYsJFP/n31pPgwM8UrXESnvrsOopw/FV5rns0cxt+ecFsSC8e zk4gcGS3fIDfEvaYdAq+NlmI8sPr0IwXZY9TpMTG32JCVhrS129kS6qZdjXhF1/QyLKI 2ucRZ7g/ud9KL21HEjqv5tr0eBen/fLT752cJx94nA6EKNRKF19QPKX7he/KahrD09/q KRtJnuAn6aoUwjLTPcxyu0fZ03fv5/FRz9LY/cp2VI/yO0SrEC7BCf0d57rLf5Sbg3ZP TsAw== X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPAyJlpKWX5fKAD4QmgWvATGDg21B3HJ6oaxv216SenXGcpayC4H nUZis6dv4e9qvZBg8O5jb6fqbZe7t/w4TVHZUiY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x2262mV5Xhu9LTEBletWIfXMcJCOPNOnOCQwJRp4V6D/wv4vjwXNETmbrP9PZ2Hww4JS6VAyqs9+ZSwxv8N/Er/c= X-Received: by 10.223.184.124 with SMTP id u57mr15609245wrf.100.1519125062979; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 03:11:02 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: cattekwaad@gmail.com Received: by 10.223.178.199 with HTTP; Tue, 20 Feb 2018 03:10:22 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <0538bb42-b677-7162-d0f6-932de3b0025d@article19.org> References: <4046d2b3-2f9b-0aeb-c23d-b0454249ac85@nielstenoever.net> <0538bb42-b677-7162-d0f6-932de3b0025d@article19.org> From: Corinne Cath Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2018 11:10:22 +0000 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 4QoZwm1m2-UPCgP3C8BkfI76fqA Message-ID: To: Mallory Knodel Cc: Hrpc Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403045f5790bf95a90565a2dd63" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Drafts and IETF 101 session X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2018 11:11:12 -0000 --f403045f5790bf95a90565a2dd63 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" +1 to what Mallory said, both on Luca Belli and making a decision. best, On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 11:08 AM, Mallory Knodel wrote: > Hi, > > I support the idea of brining in a speaker on STS. Luca Belli's work > seems like a good fit. Maybe folks have other suggestions. > > I imagine that this takes some organising so good to make a decision and > move forward with it soonest. > > -Mallory > > On 13/02/18 15:21, Niels ten Oever wrote: > > Hi Avri, > > > > On 02/12/2018 08:11 PM, avri doria wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> I am working on the summary of the comments on the RG drafts and should > >> have it in a day or so. So anyone who wants to get a comment in still > >> has time. > >> > >> With the IETF RG meeting coming up in a month or so, would like to find > >> out who has something they want to discuss or otherwise see on the > agenda. > >> > >> >From my last request: > >> > >>> Also time to collect ideas for the upcoming HRPC meeting. > >>> > >>> In addition to the continuing discussion of what next, what else would > >>> people like to see? > >>> > >>> - Who has something they want to speak about - a draft or some other > paper > > > > We have been discussing about Science and Technology studies a lot, so > > maybe an introduction to that field of studies could be interesting. > > > > Next to that we're working hard on a new version of > > draft-tenoever-hrpc-association, and I expect we'll also have a new > > version of draft-tenoever-hrpc-political. > > > >>> > >>> - Do we want to invite a speaker. > >>> > > > > An (intro to) STS lecturer might be nice/interesting. > > > > My attention was also caught by the recent work of Luca Belli who coined > > the term 'the right to network self-determination' (cf > > https://www.opendemocracy.net/luca-belli/scramble-for-data- > and-need-for-network-self-determination > > ) > > > >>> - Also plan to include discussion of updated drafts and any new drafts. > >>> Which should we expect? > >> > > > > As said: > > draft-tenoever-hrpc-association and draft-tenoever-hrpc-political > > > > Best, > > > > Niels > > > >> > >> Thanks > >> > >> avri > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> hrpc mailing list > >> hrpc@irtf.org > >> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > hrpc mailing list > > hrpc@irtf.org > > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc > > > > > -- > Mallory Knodel > Head of Digital :: article19.org > gpg fingerprint :: E3EB 63E0 65A3 B240 BCD9 B071 0C32 A271 BD3C C780 > > _______________________________________________ > hrpc mailing list > hrpc@irtf.org > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc > -- Corinne Cath Ph.D. Candidate, Oxford Internet Institute & Alan Turing Institute Web: www.oii.ox.ac.uk/people/corinne-cath Email: ccath@turing.ac.uk & corinnecath@gmail.com Twitter: @C_Cath --f403045f5790bf95a90565a2dd63 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+1 to what Mallory said, both on Luca Belli and making a decisi= on. best,

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 11:08 AM, Mallory Knodel <= mallory@article1= 9.org> wrote:
Hi,

I support the idea of brining in a speaker on STS. Luca Belli's work seems like a good fit. Maybe folks have other suggestions.

I imagine that this takes some organising so good to make a decision and move forward with it soonest.

-Mallory

On 13/02/18 15:21, Niels ten Oever wrote:
> Hi Avri,
>
> On 02/12/2018 08:11 PM, avri doria wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am working on the summary of the comments on the RG drafts and s= hould
>> have it in a day or so. So anyone who wants to get a comment in st= ill
>> has time.
>>
>> With the IETF RG meeting coming up in a month or so, would like to= find
>> out who has something they want to discuss or otherwise see on the= agenda.
>>
>> >From my last request:
>>
>>> Also time to collect ideas for the upcoming HRPC meeting.=C2= =A0
>>>
>>> In addition to the continuing discussion of what next, what el= se would
>>> people like to see?
>>>
>>> - Who has something they want to speak about - a draft or some= other paper
>
> We have been discussing about Science and Technology studies a lot, so=
> maybe an introduction to that field of studies could be interesting. >
> Next to that we're working hard on a new version of
> draft-tenoever-hrpc-association, and I expect we'll also have= a new
> version of draft-tenoever-hrpc-political.
>
>>>
>>> - Do we want to invite a speaker.
>>>
>
> An (intro to) STS lecturer might be nice/interesting.
>
> My attention was also caught by the recent work of Luca Belli who coin= ed
> the term 'the right to network self-determination' (cf
> https://www.opendemocracy.net/luca-belli/scramble-for-data-and= -need-for-network-self-determination
> )
>
>>> - Also plan to include discussion of updated drafts and any ne= w drafts.
>>> Which should we expect?
>>
>
> As said:
> draft-tenoever-hrpc-association and draft-tenoever-hrpc-political=
>
> Best,
>
> Niels
>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> avri
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> hrpc mailing list
>> hrpc@irtf.org
>> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> hrpc mailing list
> hrpc@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc >


--
Mallory Knodel
Head of Digital :: article19.org
gpg fingerprint :: E3EB 63E0 65A3 B240 BCD9=C2=A0 B071 0C32 A271 BD3C C780<= br>
____________________________= ___________________
hrpc mailing list
hrpc@irtf.org
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc



--
=
=
Corinne Cath
Ph.D. Candidate, Oxford Internet Institute= & Alan Turing Institute

We= b: www.oii.ox.ac.uk/people/corinne-cath
Email: ccath@turing.ac.uk & corinnecath@gmail.comTwitter: @C_Cath
--f403045f5790bf95a90565a2dd63-- From nobody Wed Feb 21 13:14:25 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92A8C126CD8 for ; Wed, 21 Feb 2018 13:14:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3hJHEUCbAVfo for ; Wed, 21 Feb 2018 13:14:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA8CB126C0F for ; Wed, 21 Feb 2018 13:14:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eobiU-0003jf-54 for hrpc@irtf.org; Wed, 21 Feb 2018 22:14:18 +0100 To: "hrpc@irtf.org" From: Niels ten Oever Message-ID: <12cbcb2e-ccb6-ba90-47d3-2790199a46f5@nielstenoever.net> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2018 22:14:17 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Authenticated-As-Hash: f1842a279235a42f6aa2a2a81130733515c5a4ec X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Scan-Signature: 938925967a2432a0d8c7279c30be63be Archived-At: Subject: [hrpc] new version draft-tenoever-hrpc-politica X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2018 21:14:23 -0000 Hi all, Here is a new version of draft-tenoever-hrpc political, based on review of discussions during IETF100 as well discussions on-list and two off-list threads. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tenoever-hrpc-political-03 I feel this document got more well-rounded and feels like it getting somewhere. But of course I am curious to hear what you think about that. I just saw that I did not properly push my changes to the abstract. I wanted that to be: This document maps different perspectives on the relation between protocols and politics existing in the Internet community and seeks to understand what this could mean for the IETF. But I am not 100% satisfied with that either, so comments on this and other parts are of course welcome on the list, on mail or as pull request here: https://github.com/nllz/IRTF-HRPC/blob/master/draft-political.md All the best, Niels From nobody Thu Feb 22 03:20:26 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AF0C12E91F for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 03:20:25 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.909 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id beNPniBuEIYh for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 03:20:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.nic.fr (mx4.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:2::4:12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC5C81201FA for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 03:20:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id D7CD52805DD; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 12:20:20 +0100 (CET) Received: by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 500) id D1E342805F6; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 12:20:20 +0100 (CET) Received: from relay01.prive.nic.fr (unknown [10.1.50.11]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB41E2805DD; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 12:20:20 +0100 (CET) Received: from b12.nic.fr (b12.tech.ipv6.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:1348:7::86:133]) by relay01.prive.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8D17642BE40; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 12:20:20 +0100 (CET) Received: by b12.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 1000) id BB4B84064A; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 12:20:20 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 12:20:20 +0100 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Niels ten Oever Cc: "hrpc@irtf.org" Message-ID: <20180222112020.i2whtpnd252pbv2p@nic.fr> References: <12cbcb2e-ccb6-ba90-47d3-2790199a46f5@nielstenoever.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <12cbcb2e-ccb6-ba90-47d3-2790199a46f5@nielstenoever.net> X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 9.3 X-Kernel: Linux 4.9.0-5-amd64 x86_64 X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie Organization: NIC France X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/ User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.2 X-PMX-Version: 6.0.0.2142326, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2018.2.22.110317 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] new version draft-tenoever-hrpc-politica X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 11:20:26 -0000 On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 10:14:17PM +0100, Niels ten Oever wrote a message of 35 lines which said: > Here is a new version of draft-tenoever-hrpc political, based on review > of discussions during IETF100 as well discussions on-list and two > off-list threads. > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tenoever-hrpc-political-03 Although better, this document still seems to me too vague. It is not clear for the reader what's the goal. Section 10 makes the purpose much clearer, but I suggest to summarize it right from the start, otherwise some readers will drop reading before the end. I suggest to add in the abstract "This document claims that we should acknowledge there is politics in standards, and I-D should be evaluated, among other things, in that light" (yes, it spoils, but this is a research draft, not a movie). More specifically: * the draft sometimes say "protocol" and sometimes "standards". Are they used as synonyms? If so, why, for instance, the title talks about standards and the abstract about protocols? * section 3 has a lot of overlap with RFC 8280. Should it be replaced by a reference to section 4 of RFC 8280? Editorial: * "one interpretation of [RFC7258] is that pervasive monitoring is an "attack" in the narrow sense" I'm confused here, I was not able to find what is this "narrow sense". Is it a reference to section 2? If so, it is unclear. * "Politics is the process of making decisions applying to all members of a group" I would replace "a group" by "a diverse group, with conflicting interests". It is much easier to reach decisions, if people are close, and have similar interests (one can argue this is why there was no explicit discussion of politics at the beginning of the Network Working Group: stakeholders were much more homogeneous at this time). From nobody Thu Feb 22 03:24:35 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33BC312E9D9 for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 03:24:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.909 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jQjjZ064MSmw for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 03:24:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.nic.fr (mx4.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:2::4:12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 263E01201FA for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 03:24:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id A53D42805DF; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 12:24:32 +0100 (CET) Received: by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 500) id 9F9802805FC; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 12:24:32 +0100 (CET) Received: from relay01.prive.nic.fr (relay01.prive.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:15::11]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98CC32805DF; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 12:24:32 +0100 (CET) Received: from b12.nic.fr (b12.users.prive.nic.fr [10.10.86.133]) by relay01.prive.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95686642BE40; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 12:24:32 +0100 (CET) Received: by b12.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8D6094064A; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 12:24:32 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 12:24:32 +0100 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: avri doria Cc: hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <20180222112432.534imoo4piv2w66y@nic.fr> References: <3eadd76e-f2ab-ae31-0a22-50392759217e@acm.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <3eadd76e-f2ab-ae31-0a22-50392759217e@acm.org> X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 9.3 X-Kernel: Linux 4.9.0-5-amd64 x86_64 X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie Organization: NIC France X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/ User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.021155, version=1.2.2 X-PMX-Version: 6.0.0.2142326, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2018.2.22.111816 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Draft to RG draft polling X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 11:24:35 -0000 On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 05:37:47PM -0500, avri doria wrote a message of 26 lines which said: > Did anyone read the responses differently from  me? No, I have similar readings. Practically speaking, does it mean I should repost draft-tenoever-hrpc-anonymity as draft-irtf-hrpc-anonymity? From nobody Thu Feb 22 06:10:09 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EAD1126DEE for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 06:10:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.909 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L2GqCYn5_r5m for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 06:09:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.nic.fr (mx4.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:2::4:12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7519F12711B for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 06:09:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 9FD1128094B; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 15:09:54 +0100 (CET) Received: by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 500) id 99F1E28094F; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 15:09:54 +0100 (CET) Received: from relay01.prive.nic.fr (unknown [10.1.50.11]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9326F28094B; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 15:09:54 +0100 (CET) Received: from b12.nic.fr (b12.tech.ipv6.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:1348:7::86:133]) by relay01.prive.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90A6961083E1; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 15:09:54 +0100 (CET) Received: by b12.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 832CE41249; Thu, 22 Feb 2018 15:09:54 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 15:09:54 +0100 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Niels ten Oever Cc: "hrpc@irtf.org" Message-ID: <20180222140954.ks4xhwbg2xushzaa@nic.fr> References: <151881369394.1357.13591123164657807200.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <70d3cdab-f7ee-3784-d031-1bd287a9ec82@nielstenoever.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <70d3cdab-f7ee-3784-d031-1bd287a9ec82@nielstenoever.net> X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 9.3 X-Kernel: Linux 4.9.0-5-amd64 x86_64 X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie Organization: NIC France X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/ User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.2 X-PMX-Version: 6.0.0.2142326, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2018.2.22.140615 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-tenoever-hrpc-association-03.txt X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2018 14:10:07 -0000 On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 09:50:57PM +0100, Niels ten Oever wrote a message of 76 lines which said: > Gisela and I are very happy to share a new version of the > association draft with you. Summary: I agree, I think it is important, and I think the synthesis in section 8, and its conclusion, are fine. Now, the details. > The Internet provides a global public space, but one that is built > on private infrastructure. *Mostly* (may be) on private infrastructure but not all. NRENs are a good example of public infrastructure, but there are others. (Even more if you regard DNS registries as infrastructure.) > This is also true for the Border Gateway Protocol The last paragraph of section 6 is very confused. The fact that "there is no transparency about the routes that packets have taken" has nothing to do with BGP (it is an IP issue, since "record route" - RFC 791, section 3.1 - was never deployed). Pull Request incoming. From nobody Fri Feb 23 01:20:43 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22EBA126BF0 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 01:20:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5lB55u7HjDwr for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 01:20:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.nic.fr (mx4.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:2::4:12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0AAE41243FE for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 01:20:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 33FD5280B67; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 10:20:33 +0100 (CET) Received: by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 500) id 2DFC1280B6B; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 10:20:33 +0100 (CET) Received: from relay01.prive.nic.fr (relay01.prive.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:15::11]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 272C4280B67; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 10:20:33 +0100 (CET) Received: from b12.nic.fr (b12.tech.ipv6.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:1348:7::86:133]) by relay01.prive.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23EAD642C581; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 10:20:33 +0100 (CET) Received: by b12.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 1C6A64064A; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 10:20:33 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 10:20:33 +0100 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Niels ten Oever Cc: hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <20180223092033.a6on7vn6st3z24b3@nic.fr> References: <20180216152254.4ozwqrojcfycec7h@nic.fr> <9505209c-162e-db93-8a8f-171a9969f074@nielstenoever.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9505209c-162e-db93-8a8f-171a9969f074@nielstenoever.net> X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 9.3 X-Kernel: Linux 4.9.0-5-amd64 x86_64 X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie Organization: NIC France X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/ User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.005777, version=1.2.2 X-PMX-Version: 6.0.0.2142326, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2018.2.23.91516 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] discuss draft-tenoever-hrpc-anonymity-02 X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 09:20:41 -0000 On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 06:24:23PM +0100, Niels ten Oever wrote a message of 71 lines which said: > > the idea is that, if you have easily-creatable pseudonyms, you can > > use a fresh one for each operation, thus defeating linkability > > (for instance, this is the recommended procedure for Bitcoin, see > > the EFF donation site for instance). > > Yes, but there are maybe other ways to isolate pseudonyms, rights? What is "to isolate"? > This seems to involve user-choice, which in general is good, but > maybe should not be the default in this case? You mean the default should be unique-use pseudonyms (thus making linkability more difficult) but with the ability for the user to keep the same pseudonym for a long time, for instance to build a reputation on it? Did I understand correctly? > > > A user might want to keep the persistence of their anonymous or > > > pseudonymous to an absolute minimum timespan > > > > Not clear to me. Explanations? > > The longer an anonymous identity is kept, the higher the risk it is > linked to an identity, right? Well, if there is a repeated use of an identity, it is certainly not anonymous, just pseudonymous. And for the timespan, yes, breaking the pseudonymity is not binary: some pseudonyms are trivially linkable to an "official" identity, some are not. And the longer you use them, the more clues you give to someone who wants to unveil your identity. Added in commit a9d56eebe132b3321c783685c83bf90377a0b04b > > > A user might want to understood which other actors might > > > (potentially) have which level of information about them. > > > > Hmmm, it seems an use case for identification, not for anonymity? > > ("OK, Google, I want to know everything you know about me") > > Or an opportunity for inventarization, threat modeling and informed > decision making by the data subject. Not sure I get it but I tried to give an example in commit a9d56eebe132b3321c783685c83bf90377a0b04b: "Example: if a domain name registry does not publish the name of a registrant, the registrant cannot check if the person who did the registration indicated the name of their client, or their own name." From nobody Fri Feb 23 02:30:15 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59D51124319 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 02:30:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 184BkO6m29Uy for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 02:30:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.nic.fr (mx4.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:2::4:12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 733741242EA for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 02:30:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 9D7DA280E7C; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 11:30:08 +0100 (CET) Received: by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 500) id 97827280EA9; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 11:30:08 +0100 (CET) Received: from relay01.prive.nic.fr (unknown [10.1.50.11]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90E49280E7C; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 11:30:08 +0100 (CET) Received: from b12.nic.fr (b12.tech.ipv6.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:1348:7::86:133]) by relay01.prive.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C42E665BB60; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 11:30:08 +0100 (CET) Received: by b12.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 86A5C4064A; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 11:30:08 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 11:30:08 +0100 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Niels ten Oever Cc: "hrpc@irtf.org" Message-ID: <20180223103008.cd27zygitwevlpjx@nic.fr> References: <151881369394.1357.13591123164657807200.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <70d3cdab-f7ee-3784-d031-1bd287a9ec82@nielstenoever.net> <20180222140954.ks4xhwbg2xushzaa@nic.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180222140954.ks4xhwbg2xushzaa@nic.fr> X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 9.3 X-Kernel: Linux 4.9.0-5-amd64 x86_64 X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie Organization: NIC France X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/ User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000001, version=1.2.2 X-PMX-Version: 6.0.0.2142326, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2018.2.23.102416 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-tenoever-hrpc-association-03.txt X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 10:30:13 -0000 On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 03:09:54PM +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote a message of 30 lines which said: > "record route" - RFC 791, section 3.1 - was never deployed). Fact checking: this is false. I'm very surprised to see it still works. I change my Pull Request. % sudo ping -c 1 -4 -R www.ietf.org PING www.ietf.org.cdn.cloudflare.net (104.20.0.85) 56(124) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 104.20.0.85: icmp_seq=1 ttl=58 time=4.61 ms RR: ... 209.66.115.110.t01331.above.net (209.66.115.110) lo0.mpr1.ewr1.us.zip.zayo.com (64.125.0.242) lo0.er2.lga5.us.zip.zayo.com (64.125.0.194) 199.27.132.1 <- Cloudflare router 104.20.0.85 <- Cloudflare (IETF hosting provider) [Here, the return path, incomplete] 104.20.0.85 <- Cloudflare (IETF hosting provider) 199.27.132.1 <- Cloudflare router lo0.er2.lga5.us.zip.zayo.com (64.125.0.194) --- www.ietf.org.cdn.cloudflare.net ping statistics --- 1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 0ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 4.616/4.616/4.616/0.000 ms A traceroute from the same machine (showing only the first leg). Note the small differences (router recording a different address, or not recording at all): % traceroute www.ietf.org traceroute to www.ietf.org (104.20.0.85), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets ... 2 xe-3-2-1.mpr1.ewr1.us.above.net (209.66.115.109) 0.497 ms 0.542 ms 0.539 ms 3 * * * 4 ae1.cs1.lga5.us.eth.zayo.com (64.125.29.200) 0.897 ms 1.053 ms 1.044 ms 5 ae10.er2.lga5.us.zip.zayo.com (64.125.27.157) 0.989 ms 1.023 ms 1.027 ms 6 198.32.118.206 (198.32.118.206) 1.238 ms 1.269 ms 1.420 ms 7 104.20.0.85 (104.20.0.85) 1.470 ms 1.471 ms 1.464 ms Note also the limits mentioned in the ping man page: * Note that the IP header is only large enough for nine such routes. * Many hosts ignore or discard this option. From nobody Fri Feb 23 05:18:24 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF43112E049 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 05:18:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.235 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.235 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id p52SJZYADSd0 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 05:18:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtprelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0010.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71A4C12E057 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 05:18:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (clb03-v110.bra.tucows.net [216.40.38.60]) by smtprelay08.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46EB5182CED28 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 13:18:14 +0000 (UTC) X-Session-Marker: 6176726940646F7269612E6F7267 X-Spam-Summary: 2, 0, 0, , d41d8cd98f00b204, avri@acm.org, :, RULES_HIT:41:152:355:379:421:599:854:988:989:1260:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1359:1381:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1537:1566:1593:1594:1711:1714:1730:1747:1777:1792:2393:2553:2559:2562:2693:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3865:3867:3871:3872:3873:4184:5007:7652:7901:8634:10004:10400:10848:11232:11658:11914:12740:12895:13069:13071:13161:13229:13311:13357:13894:14180:14721:14777:21060:21080:21324:21627:30054:30070, 0, RBL:158.85.23.147:@acm.org:.lbl8.mailshell.net-62.22.0.100 64.201.201.201, CacheIP:none, Bayesian:0.5, 0.5, 0.5, Netcheck:none, DomainCache:0, MSF:not bulk, SPF:fs, MSBL:0, DNSBL:neutral, Custom_rules:0:0:0, LFtime:19, LUA_SUMMARY:none X-HE-Tag: birds40_820cdaad4c906 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 1286 Received: from [198.18.8.74] (93.17.559e.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [158.85.23.147]) (Authenticated sender: avri@doria.org) by omf02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 13:18:13 +0000 (UTC) Reply-To: avri@acm.org References: <3eadd76e-f2ab-ae31-0a22-50392759217e@acm.org> <20180222112432.534imoo4piv2w66y@nic.fr> To: hrpc@irtf.org From: avri doria Message-ID: <6d65ac25-64de-2f0d-824f-4444dd30280f@acm.org> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 08:17:55 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180222112432.534imoo4piv2w66y@nic.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 180222-2, 02/22/2018), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Draft to RG draft polling X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 13:18:24 -0000 Hi, On 22-Feb-18 06:24, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > Practically speaking, does it mean I should repost > draft-tenoever-hrpc-anonymity as draft-irtf-hrpc-anonymity? You can, or you can wait until the next revision, up to you.  I think there is a step I have to take to enable it, so once I check on the process, I will get back to you. avri From nobody Fri Feb 23 05:59:43 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94FDA124239 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 05:59:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id g6e_uaKxT9sI for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 05:59:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.nic.fr (mx4.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:2::4:12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DCCA11201FA for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 05:59:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 1CB93280142; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:59:36 +0100 (CET) Received: by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 500) id 16D58280602; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:59:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from relay01.prive.nic.fr (unknown [10.1.50.11]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 101CF280142; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:59:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from b12.nic.fr (b12.tech.ipv6.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:1348:7::86:133]) by relay01.prive.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C74B642C581; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:59:36 +0100 (CET) Received: by b12.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 1000) id F407141C0B; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:59:35 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:59:35 +0100 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Andrew Sullivan Cc: hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <20180223135935.rjkzpx3s67of7zqq@nic.fr> References: <21d44e51-ed5a-08ac-ab8e-712235e3c8bc@acm.org> <127d8627-ad2a-f7d2-c385-956999f0a9fd@derechosdigitales.org> <20180123105207.GE28814@mir> <20180124124125.GE4995@mir> <20180124194548.GA13745@anvilwalrusden.com> <20180206132056.GI26829@mir> <20180207053052.GA1834@mx4.yitter.info> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20180207053052.GA1834@mx4.yitter.info> X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 9.3 X-Kernel: Linux 4.9.0-5-amd64 x86_64 X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie Organization: NIC France X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/ User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) X-Bogosity: Unsure, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.494735, version=1.2.2 X-PMX-Version: 6.0.0.2142326, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2018.2.23.134215 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Freedom of Association on the Internet X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 13:59:42 -0000 On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 12:30:52AM -0500, Andrew Sullivan wrote a message of 110 lines which said: > What is mystifying to me is how to transform any such candidate > right into something that constrains the UDHR 20(2) right of > non-association in a way that means the Internet can't fall apart. About the issue of "mandatory peering" (not a good term, but I'm too lazy to find a better one), HRPC participants may be interested by the bolivian law of 2011 "Artículo 50. (INTERCONEXIÓN ENTRE PROVEEDORES DE INTERNET). Los proveedores de internet, deben obligatoriamente establecer y aceptar interconexiones entre sí, dentro del territorio nacional, a través de un punto de intercambio de tráfico, a fin de cursar el tráfico de internet, de acuerdo a las condiciones establecidas mediante reglamento." I translate it very roughly "Article 50 (interconnection of Internet access providers). Internet access providers MUST set up interconnections between them, inside the country, through an Internet exchange point, to exchange Internet traffic. The precise conditions will be described in a regulation." [AFAIK, this regulation is being drafted currently.] Before evaluating this law, remember that Bolivia is the poorest country in Latin America and, outside OECD countries, the default behavior of IAP is to interconnect outside of the country. From nobody Fri Feb 23 06:18:05 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8832F12E741 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 06:18:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.235 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.235 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yoqCUTTmNyON for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 06:18:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtprelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0206.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.206]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D672127201 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 06:18:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (clb03-v110.bra.tucows.net [216.40.38.60]) by smtprelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0157019B2C for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:18:02 +0000 (UTC) X-Session-Marker: 6176726940646F7269612E6F7267 X-Spam-Summary: 2, -10, 0, , d41d8cd98f00b204, avri@acm.org, :, RULES_HIT:41:152:355:379:421:599:800:854:966:967:973:988:989:1260:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1359:1381:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1540:1593:1594:1711:1730:1747:1777:1792:2196:2199:2393:2525:2553:2560:2563:2682:2685:2693:2859:2933:2937:2939:2942:2945:2947:2951:2954:3022:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3352:3865:3867:3868:3871:3872:3873:3934:3936:3938:3941:3944:3947:3950:3953:3956:3959:4184:4362:4385:4860:5007:6117:7652:7901:7903:8634:9010:9025:10004:10400:10848:11232:11658:11914:12043:12291:12379:12438:12683:12740:12895:13069:13071:13311:13357:13846:13894:14095:14180:14181:14721:14764:14777:21060:21080:21324:21627:30030:30054:30060:30070, 0, RBL:158.85.23.147:@acm.org:.lbl8.mailshell.net-62.22.0.100 64.201.201.201, CacheIP:none, Bayesian:0.5, 0.5, 0.5, Netcheck:none, DomainCache:0, MSF:not bulk, SPF:fs, MSBL:0, DNSBL:neutral, Custom_rules:0:0:0, LFtime:20, LUA_SUMMARY:none X-HE-Tag: crime59_45ff932a48f0d X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 1827 Received: from [198.18.8.74] (93.17.559e.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [158.85.23.147]) (Authenticated sender: avri@doria.org) by omf09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:18:00 +0000 (UTC) Reply-To: avri@acm.org To: hrpc@irtf.org References: <3eadd76e-f2ab-ae31-0a22-50392759217e@acm.org> <20180222112432.534imoo4piv2w66y@nic.fr> <6d65ac25-64de-2f0d-824f-4444dd30280f@acm.org> From: avri doria Message-ID: Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 09:17:53 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <6d65ac25-64de-2f0d-824f-4444dd30280f@acm.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 180222-2, 02/22/2018), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Draft to RG draft polling X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:18:04 -0000 Hi, For the two drafts, draft-irtf-hrpc-guidelines-00 draft-irtf-hrpc-anonymity-00 Please feel free to submit your next version under those names.  You can either rename your current version and re-submit, or wait until your next revision, as you please. thanks avri On 23-Feb-18 08:17, avri doria wrote: > Hi, > > > On 22-Feb-18 06:24, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: >> Practically speaking, does it mean I should repost >> draft-tenoever-hrpc-anonymity as draft-irtf-hrpc-anonymity? > You can, or you can wait until the next revision, up to you.  I think > there is a step I have to take to enable it, so once I check on the > process, I will get back to you. > > avri > > > _______________________________________________ > hrpc mailing list > hrpc@irtf.org > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc From nobody Fri Feb 23 06:34:45 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@irtf.org Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6991712E885; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 06:34:30 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: Cc: hrpc@irtf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.72.3 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <151939647037.24147.11779833265576181212@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 06:34:30 -0800 Archived-At: Subject: [hrpc] I-D Action: draft-irtf-hrpc-anonymity-00.txt X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:34:36 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Human Rights Protocol Considerations RG of the IRTF. Title : Anonymity, Human Rights and Internet Protocols Authors : Stephane Bortzmeyer Niels ten Oever Filename : draft-irtf-hrpc-anonymity-00.txt Pages : 11 Date : 2018-02-23 Abstract: Anonymity is less discussed in the IETF than for instance security [RFC3552] or privacy [RFC6973]. This can be attributed to the fact anonymity is a hard technical problem or that anonymizing user data is not of specific market interest. It remains a fact that 'most internet users would like to be anonymous online at least occasionally' [Pew]. This document aims to break down the different meanings and implications of anonymity on a mediated computer network. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-hrpc-anonymity/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-hrpc-anonymity-00 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-irtf-hrpc-anonymity-00 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Fri Feb 23 06:41:51 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6158D1270FC for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 06:41:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ofCQTUqGGu3s for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 06:41:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.nic.fr (mx4.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:2218:2::4:12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14BC8124D6C for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 06:41:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.nic.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 483C62801B2; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 15:41:39 +0100 (CET) Received: by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 500) id 42C5F280658; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 15:41:39 +0100 (CET) Received: from relay01.prive.nic.fr (unknown [10.1.50.11]) by mx4.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C4A12801B2; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 15:41:39 +0100 (CET) Received: from b12.nic.fr (b12.tech.ipv6.nic.fr [IPv6:2001:67c:1348:7::86:133]) by relay01.prive.nic.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39AB6663EBE0; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 15:41:39 +0100 (CET) Received: by b12.nic.fr (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 33F1D41C0B; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 15:41:39 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 15:41:39 +0100 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: avri doria Cc: hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <20180223144139.koppwcko3eaury2m@nic.fr> References: <3eadd76e-f2ab-ae31-0a22-50392759217e@acm.org> <20180222112432.534imoo4piv2w66y@nic.fr> <6d65ac25-64de-2f0d-824f-4444dd30280f@acm.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Operating-System: Debian GNU/Linux 9.3 X-Kernel: Linux 4.9.0-5-amd64 x86_64 X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie Organization: NIC France X-URL: http://www.nic.fr/ User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) X-Bogosity: No, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.020861, version=1.2.2 X-PMX-Version: 6.0.0.2142326, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2018.2.23.143017 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Draft to RG draft polling X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:41:50 -0000 On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 09:17:53AM -0500, avri doria wrote a message of 17 lines which said: > draft-irtf-hrpc-anonymity-00 Done. Some changes, that you can see in From nobody Fri Feb 23 07:39:11 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 123F912E872 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 07:39:10 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yitter.info header.b=WtcI4RUo; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yitter.info header.b=bKr2XeC5 Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cEE5rvmwkDb0 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 07:39:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.yitter.info (mx4.yitter.info [159.203.56.111]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A55F512E896 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 07:38:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTP id C32C0BE777 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 15:38:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1519400317; bh=ziUK/EmoOgxu5yY9/yCv7bsDQUVG1Mm3WHcIT8EZ+r8=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=WtcI4RUopwqWIqDi1zbJhKUEefI22cCFuMCYQuaYDVdmHZLdM+kN58HAQbMT1o/s5 JJ0c+cRLuaipsKBkOLvDiA7HYlCBUHRDCyxW380vnd/NUCq01pbKenc32dR4NAUfT9 qcsnj9/TC6KQ/cI0YKCP6gWHhVyTs88tSkxhZohA= X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at crankycanuck.ca Received: from mx4.yitter.info ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx4.yitter.info [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Yd1cAJ103_wD for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 15:38:36 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 10:38:35 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1519400316; bh=ziUK/EmoOgxu5yY9/yCv7bsDQUVG1Mm3WHcIT8EZ+r8=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=bKr2XeC5ZAV7Id14N6p2qoDSbsKpSzjVeMHIiNFLR4nH7Yalo/3iG2RmApNLUGYT6 BNayK81mNpec1w7NZRmEA5jdQgk8hynCWiaX8kryG5ACibuYElr4kOdSUhvUD7tS7t 5P8T9psric/m5JXnI7z2C2+txjmv+4avQ4cHe6wM= From: Andrew Sullivan To: hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <20180223153834.yuyejk7wbixmgtt2@mx4.yitter.info> References: <21d44e51-ed5a-08ac-ab8e-712235e3c8bc@acm.org> <127d8627-ad2a-f7d2-c385-956999f0a9fd@derechosdigitales.org> <20180123105207.GE28814@mir> <20180124124125.GE4995@mir> <20180124194548.GA13745@anvilwalrusden.com> <20180206132056.GI26829@mir> <20180207053052.GA1834@mx4.yitter.info> <20180223135935.rjkzpx3s67of7zqq@nic.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180223135935.rjkzpx3s67of7zqq@nic.fr> Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Freedom of Association on the Internet X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 15:39:10 -0000 Hi, On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 02:59:35PM +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > > About the issue of "mandatory peering" (not a good term, but I'm too > lazy to find a better one), HRPC participants may be interested by the > bolivian law of 2011 I think the example is an interesting one. The danger from a technical point of view, of course, is that the Internet could be transformed into a country-based catanet if everyone did this. > Before evaluating this law, remember that Bolivia is the poorest > country in Latin America and, outside OECD countries, the default > behavior of IAP is to interconnect outside of the country. There are indeed good arguments for why to do it in that case. But many regulatory regimes have good arguments behind them, but in practice turn out to have technical consequences people didn't understand and that they find undesirable. And of course none of this addresses the question of whether there are rights involved here. It does appear to suggest that, in Bolivia, you give up your right of disassociation from others if you want to carry traffic on behalf of some other set of others. Without a lot of study, it's hard to say whether such an arrangement is good for the Internet in Boliva, and I doubt I am qualified to do such a study because of how weak my knowledge of local language and markets is. Best regards, A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com From nobody Fri Feb 23 08:17:56 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15CCC127241 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 08:17:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G8mCLaXm9_qm for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 08:17:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E8AB12D7E8 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 08:17:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1epG2e-0000CE-Ap; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 17:17:49 +0100 Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 17:17:47 +0100 From: Niels ten Oever To: hrpc@irtf.org Cc: luca.belli@fgv.br Message-ID: <20180223161747.GC25767@mir> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Bu8it7iiRSEf40bY" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.3 (2018-01-21) X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Scan-Signature: 488b5a33f748713be529de57fa847022 Archived-At: Subject: [hrpc] Luca Belli confirmed as speaker X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 16:17:54 -0000 --Bu8it7iiRSEf40bY Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear all, Dr. Luca Belli from Brazil confirmed his ability to give a presentation dur= ing hrpc at IETF101. There are good chances he might even join us in person= =2E His presentation will revolve around the concept of 'network self-deter= mination', but soon he will write something about that as an introduction t= o this list. Have a look at his article about this topic here: http://bibliotecadigital.= fgv.br/dspace/handle/10438/19924=20 Direct PDF link: http://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/dspace/bitstream/handle/10= 438/19924/Network%20Self-Determination%20and%20the%20Positive%20Externaliti= es%20of%20Community%20Networks.pdf?sequence=3D1&isAllowed=3Dy All the best, Niels --=20 Niels ten Oever Researcher and PhD Candidate Datactive Research Group University of Amsterdam PGP fingerprint 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488 =20 643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3 --Bu8it7iiRSEf40bY Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEJFgLcFxK/YqUiGQ6Dtg/OkaKyLMFAlqQPqsACgkQDtg/OkaK yLOLFA/+O102oeN8JvIQFASOY63+/pnTUbULdfClkWxWqSKiQo6Xi56pL6DxSuXu ZKRf+rudzBgAqGzFXSc/5rwMioMLRTp+5jQ8UBpCpaOF2I1zd4ouCM4l3zaFQNwS 2Ja/oI3l2rFsUEb3mzMrPVbNMb5kr+Bwfc9vr2J4Q450vLkCVpatbwjRgYgDkUTt cF35A1lmsXx1HEpe/KMxzQJYvwHSGvjrTowFLfJNO4ypTvs7sl51cm6y/mkXxQBw Mg1t0GYnyUt+vUXhb5x/0xN6Zjh3D1uWa5eEOVCak6Gr0H8yUPywqOzeiJ3vUUAc mDMUc4iUliuWCbQpGDyRlG/OoXdEu08sCC2VlnN6q6bjcxbYUBRkuKs4NoLwgo/Z baNFKtFIdFq+Ev6rn9T7yjf3O82yVnddgaEG2TNjxGrcs8P1Y1Ra4YPqXgX2h48Y YmivebqCKmHgF8D//CPnRbha6vBPPrgA2gIH/mahXCguZ0N9T7h6yUhtz/46NXXC wZpsdPw4tBraTAhAtnOlcgLgwZylAF36bjAuGSdNXQFoHHnDeuPQvByM5QuYx4k5 RpVaK482wWHKwGblYVN9sS+5ErQpS9fsuxDkZyCQliAOItixE0U8L+deJuoiNNJ7 +yqM8Axs2V3nY/l4Aqx+SiiX4VP9GFjGMVErftpUs7AuJAw7sas= =msrl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Bu8it7iiRSEf40bY-- From nobody Fri Feb 23 09:10:22 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 294E712D77B for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 09:10:21 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.699 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oqXEwOFAEo1z for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 09:10:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-wm0-x233.google.com (mail-wm0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF6251241F3 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 09:10:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm0-x233.google.com with SMTP id t3so5944929wmc.2 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 09:10:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=vfO7ejTF8tklWzjGtPJnL7Bw4KgR3HB4btvSBuEYb1A=; b=iLusglMJiK2drXtdLZmwtYKpEicXYOLjYU3n+iLbnpHikZdXwdSNxrEOCA8200uuvR 0l+gRPJMH6ohrFD6cSoKbpQ3hUYjFPUmj/xW9aYe5ipodlWTnrCKVU0lj8bNZcLv/8Vo urbpso8jydXn7hO8RMKOlSCIMrfzf45ZIXbygFTyugYTbrCIKna451qN1xOo0nE0eamA DMD7jAEWDdzlzn5erfNnnuSaCRre6SywlkPXRMNWYI1JuNKQYo9SotBYTScILNu5SnRK aiHY6DeA8Q6EwixwyGx7DHwFbMmK9aR6eo8JzPzp3YFqIPYHv1Vj0MzARRk6M7uE44VZ 0y4Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=vfO7ejTF8tklWzjGtPJnL7Bw4KgR3HB4btvSBuEYb1A=; b=bJa8/+rvTfHUsHPV9A6aT2fUx9G5mYbUNE4I2m7sDQioUyJdp/OIEDE5PV6Ai/dsxK FFEjtFojOgzL+iMmghir1XqWhi1loMdNG18z5jWtZ4+S+ime+TqnD7yKqGKrRFLr5a+w zZk7LRxwwtB+IxvweNcCH8QQSPnFFtbtBnt8GuXs5YlURTI+QGtr8AyEKSgYGKXt5q1p VtY9BUgtWLtH2cBIEn7Gjh7B3Fq32guZZzV06JC87R1YJXdhJ/G/4wQYLRnxeLUb7ToK X5O2OIBFKBXkiTjAje5sWr+0zikYuw1p4tqJ1gkM8tMVJ5SM/2YugRpk0OKEg9k/PNfZ qDhQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPBm3G7csmx2RBwPoPB/E1EQ4n+70Mklfeh3fwtlzgTEjnMuhLWT oI282eH+XqN8dqmU48lF5M6ynoSbNURjTgZ+vcE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELvOEQuKfQODySKEvAp85pt/uB722y02LkahbiTNpRqkrvLkM7ZNyBA5t3zFnXsJySB99J+m0ehN2jJ4ywzfDIQ= X-Received: by 10.28.10.206 with SMTP id 197mr2211898wmk.61.1519405817191; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 09:10:17 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: cattekwaad@gmail.com Received: by 10.223.178.199 with HTTP; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 09:09:36 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20180223161747.GC25767@mir> References: <20180223161747.GC25767@mir> From: Corinne Cath Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 17:09:36 +0000 X-Google-Sender-Auth: J6Hd2jAGZS__e53mXuB5f-mPyFQ Message-ID: To: Niels ten Oever Cc: Hrpc , luca.belli@fgv.br Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11444aa200e17b0565e43cab" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Luca Belli confirmed as speaker X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 17:10:21 -0000 --001a11444aa200e17b0565e43cab Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Great, looking forward to it! best, On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 4:17 PM, Niels ten Oever wrote: > Dear all, > > Dr. Luca Belli from Brazil confirmed his ability to give a presentation > during hrpc at IETF101. There are good chances he might even join us in > person. His presentation will revolve around the concept of 'network > self-determination', but soon he will write something about that as an > introduction to this list. > > Have a look at his article about this topic here: > http://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/dspace/handle/10438/19924 > > Direct PDF link: http://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/dspace/bitstream/handle/ > 10438/19924/Network%20Self-Determination%20and%20the% > 20Positive%20Externalities%20of%20Community%20Networks. > pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y > > All the best, > > Niels > > > -- > > Niels ten Oever > Researcher and PhD Candidate > Datactive Research Group > University of Amsterdam > > PGP fingerprint 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488 > 643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3 > > > _______________________________________________ > hrpc mailing list > hrpc@irtf.org > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc > > -- Corinne Cath Ph.D. Candidate, Oxford Internet Institute & Alan Turing Institute Web: www.oii.ox.ac.uk/people/corinne-cath Email: ccath@turing.ac.uk & corinnecath@gmail.com Twitter: @C_Cath --001a11444aa200e17b0565e43cab Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Great, looking forward to it! best,

On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 4:17 PM, = Niels ten Oever <mail@nielstenoever.net> wrote:
Dear all,

Dr. Luca Belli from Brazil confirmed his ability to give a presentation dur= ing hrpc at IETF101. There are good chances he might even join us in person= . His presentation will revolve around the concept of 'network self-det= ermination', but soon he will write something about that as an introduc= tion to this list.

Have a look at his article about this topic here: http://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/dspace/handle/10438/19924
Direct PDF link: http://bibliotecadigital.fgv.b= r/dspace/bitstream/handle/10438/19924/Network%20Self-Determinatio= n%20and%20the%20Positive%20Externalities%20of%20Community%20Netwo= rks.pdf?sequence=3D1&isAllowed=3Dy

All the best,

Niels


--

Niels ten Oever
Researcher and PhD Candidate
Datactive Research Group
University of Amsterdam

PGP fingerprint=C2=A0 =C2=A0 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0643A 0= ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3


_______________________________________________
hrpc mailing list
hrpc@irtf.org
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc




--
=
Corinne Cath
Ph.D. Candidate, Oxford Internet Institute & Al= an Turing Institute

Web: www.oii= .ox.ac.uk/people/corinne-cath
Email: ccath@turing.ac.uk & corinnecath@gmail.com
Twitter= : @C_Cath
=
--001a11444aa200e17b0565e43cab-- From nobody Fri Feb 23 15:15:54 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84456120725 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 15:15:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.235 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.235 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ye406dCz2YfD for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 15:15:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtprelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0236.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFEAB120713 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 15:15:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (clb03-v110.bra.tucows.net [216.40.38.60]) by smtprelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B88562705B for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 23:15:49 +0000 (UTC) X-Session-Marker: 6176726940646F7269612E6F7267 X-Spam-Summary: 2, -15, 0, , d41d8cd98f00b204, avri@acm.org, ::, RULES_HIT:41:355:379:599:800:854:871:967:969:973:988:989:1000:1260:1263:1313:1314:1345:1359:1381:1437:1516:1518:1534:1541:1575:1594:1711:1730:1747:1777:1792:2194:2199:2393:2525:2553:2560:2565:2682:2685:2693:2859:2902:2933:2937:2939:2942:2945:2947:2951:2954:3022:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3352:3865:3866:3867:3870:3874:3934:3936:3938:3941:3944:3947:3950:3953:3956:3959:4184:4250:4362:4860:5007:6117:6119:6506:6747:6748:7281:7628:7652:7903:7909:7974:8634:9010:9025:9108:9121:9388:9871:10004:10049:10848:11232:11233:11604:11658:11914:12043:12050:12291:12379:12438:12555:12683:12740:12895:12903:12986:13017:13018:13019:13846:14095:14096:14180:14181:14227:14658:14659:14721:14849:21060:21063:21080:21326:21347:21433:21451:21627:21740:30054:30060, 0, RBL:error, CacheIP:none, Bayesian:0.5, 0.5, 0.5, Netcheck:none, DomainCache:0, MSF:not bulk, SPF:fs, MSBL:0, DNSBL:neutral, Custom_rules:0:0:0, LFtime:21, LUA_SUMMARY:none X-HE-Tag: bells13_6d0d5aeaf4544 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 3482 Received: from [198.18.8.74] (93.17.559e.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [158.85.23.147]) (Authenticated sender: avri@doria.org) by omf05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 23:15:49 +0000 (UTC) Reply-To: avri@acm.org To: hrpc@irtf.org References: <20180223161747.GC25767@mir> From: avri doria Message-ID: Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 18:15:09 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180223161747.GC25767@mir> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="EsHNorET2FBCehlpYkbHyn2mFU0rZPNdR" X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 180223-10, 02/23/2018), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Luca Belli confirmed as speaker X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 23:15:52 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --EsHNorET2FBCehlpYkbHyn2mFU0rZPNdR Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="m0pTzgNuWhtT54viyU7t7eMqb954LU0jZ"; protected-headers="v1" From: avri doria Reply-To: avri@acm.org To: hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Luca Belli confirmed as speaker References: <20180223161747.GC25767@mir> In-Reply-To: <20180223161747.GC25767@mir> --m0pTzgNuWhtT54viyU7t7eMqb954LU0jZ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Language: en-US Hi, Thanks for setting this up.=A0 Be great if he can be there. I will put together a draft agenda next week. So am still collecting interest in drafts, or issues participants in the RG=A0 would like to see= on the agenda. Thanks avri On 23-Feb-18 11:17, Niels ten Oever wrote: > Dear all, > > Dr. Luca Belli from Brazil confirmed his ability to give a presentation= during hrpc at IETF101. There are good chances he might even join us in = person. His presentation will revolve around the concept of 'network self= -determination', but soon he will write something about that as an introd= uction to this list. > > Have a look at his article about this topic here: http://bibliotecadigi= tal.fgv.br/dspace/handle/10438/19924=20 > > Direct PDF link: http://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/dspace/bitstream/handl= e/10438/19924/Network%20Self-Determination%20and%20the%20Positive%20Exter= nalities%20of%20Community%20Networks.pdf?sequence=3D1&isAllowed=3Dy > > All the best, > > Niels > > > > > _______________________________________________ > hrpc mailing list > hrpc@irtf.org > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc --m0pTzgNuWhtT54viyU7t7eMqb954LU0jZ-- --EsHNorET2FBCehlpYkbHyn2mFU0rZPNdR Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJakKChAAoJEOo+L8tCe36Hjx8H/0Zfig9x9VwmB8JorX5WniiL YU9jnKAPtk2r6JZl1AjKE/KFUXGRHxY0+s0xXTDIWC6aG/ktXjWKxQF7Bza7d4AK sl+H77s6wC7a+bvmNxmuvxY2KjwXPOwWFvhYCPli0kr4EEbKSkhRZ+3sMv34ilfR AuOkwdqeDHHoqLU/LQlQPujbn2TEPLP38g2hw5UKWraooP3Sz9fG/NtwV08sIMVt gaCRrervKyJ2HPJQZwKNS1iFvfwqoHzj76ue0TmCtRX4EDtVgSzA5lVZQfXE/ZHP NU8dvIylGWsVoLoPldGulW78xiA9MvDlhKdpbjJjsq1EJgvSPMw9oa0yFAJ44/E= =XlUJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --EsHNorET2FBCehlpYkbHyn2mFU0rZPNdR-- From luca.belli@fgv.br Fri Feb 23 11:10:34 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1F84126C2F for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 11:10:33 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.909 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.909 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AC_DIV_BONANZA=0.001, BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4dIt6QvEb4yt for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 11:10:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from DC6009.fgv.br (dc6009.fgv.br [189.125.96.253]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57F441201F2 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 11:10:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from DC6010.fgv.br ([fe80::150d:d380:2368:fdde]) by DC6009.fgv.br ([fe80::cd12:109b:ed4e:97e3%16]) with mapi id 14.03.0361.001; Fri, 23 Feb 2018 16:10:25 -0300 From: Luca Belli To: Corinne Cath , Niels ten Oever CC: Hrpc Thread-Topic: [hrpc] Luca Belli confirmed as speaker Thread-Index: AQHTrMHfRa3sY/t2dUmeWETXbcHcG6OyavAA///tLBA= Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 19:10:25 +0000 Message-ID: <4B6296ABAE1FC944984F6C9FE996FE19014AC7ACB8@DC6010.fgv.br> References: <20180223161747.GC25767@mir> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: pt-BR, en-US Content-Language: pt-BR X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.20.52.82] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4B6296ABAE1FC944984F6C9FE996FE19014AC7ACB8DC6010fgvbr_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 24 Feb 2018 04:54:44 -0800 Subject: [hrpc] RES: Luca Belli confirmed as speaker X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2018 19:12:09 -0000 --_000_4B6296ABAE1FC944984F6C9FE996FE19014AC7ACB8DC6010fgvbr_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 VGhhbmsgeW91IHZlcnkgbXVjaCBmb3IgdGhlIHZlcnkga2luZCBpbnZpdGF0aW9uDQoNCkZvciB0 aG9zZSB3aG8gZG8gbm90IGhhdmUgdGltZSB0byByZWFkIHRoZSBwYXBlciwgSSB3aWxsIHNoYXJl IGEgcG9zdCB3aXRoIHNvbWUgdGhvdWdodHMgb24gTmV0d29yayBTZWxmLWRldGVybWluYXRpb24s IHRoZSB3ZWVrIGJlZm9yZSBJRVRGIDEwMS4NCg0KSSBhbSB2ZXJ5IG11Y2ggbG9va2luZyBmb3J3 YXJkIHRvIGRpc2N1c3NpbmcgdGhpcyB3aXRoIHlvdSBhbmQgaGVhcmluZyB5b3VyIGZlZWRiYWNr DQoNCktpbmQgcmVnYXJkcw0KTHVjYQ0KDQpbRkdWIERpcmVpdG8gUmlvXQ0KDQpMdWNhIEJlbGxp LCBQaEQNClNlbmlvciBSZXNlYXJjaGVyDQpIZWFkIG9mIEludGVybmV0IEdvdmVybmFuY2UgQCBG R1Y8aHR0cDovL2ludGVybmV0LWdvdmVybmFuY2UuZmd2LmJyLz4NCmx1Y2EuYmVsbGlAZmd2LmJy DQorNTUgMjEgMzc5OSA1NzYzDQpAMWx1Y2FiZWxsaTxodHRwczovL3R3aXR0ZXIuY29tLzFsdWNh YmVsbGk+DQoNCltodHRwOi8vd3d3LmZndi5ici9tYWlsaW5nL0RpcmVpdG9fUmlvL2Fzc2luYXR1 cmFfZW1haWwvT25kYXMucG5nXQ0KDQoNCg0KRGU6IGNhdHRla3dhYWRAZ21haWwuY29tIFttYWls dG86Y2F0dGVrd2FhZEBnbWFpbC5jb21dIEVtIG5vbWUgZGUgQ29yaW5uZSBDYXRoDQpFbnZpYWRh IGVtOiBzZXh0YS1mZWlyYSwgMjMgZGUgZmV2ZXJlaXJvIGRlIDIwMTggMTQ6MTANClBhcmE6IE5p ZWxzIHRlbiBPZXZlciA8bWFpbEBuaWVsc3Rlbm9ldmVyLm5ldD4NCkNjOiBIcnBjIDxocnBjQGly dGYub3JnPjsgTHVjYSBCZWxsaSA8bHVjYS5iZWxsaUBmZ3YuYnI+DQpBc3N1bnRvOiBSZTogW2hy cGNdIEx1Y2EgQmVsbGkgY29uZmlybWVkIGFzIHNwZWFrZXINCg0KR3JlYXQsIGxvb2tpbmcgZm9y d2FyZCB0byBpdCEgYmVzdCwNCg0KT24gRnJpLCBGZWIgMjMsIDIwMTggYXQgNDoxNyBQTSwgTmll bHMgdGVuIE9ldmVyIDxtYWlsQG5pZWxzdGVub2V2ZXIubmV0PG1haWx0bzptYWlsQG5pZWxzdGVu b2V2ZXIubmV0Pj4gd3JvdGU6DQpEZWFyIGFsbCwNCg0KRHIuIEx1Y2EgQmVsbGkgZnJvbSBCcmF6 aWwgY29uZmlybWVkIGhpcyBhYmlsaXR5IHRvIGdpdmUgYSBwcmVzZW50YXRpb24gZHVyaW5nIGhy cGMgYXQgSUVURjEwMS4gVGhlcmUgYXJlIGdvb2QgY2hhbmNlcyBoZSBtaWdodCBldmVuIGpvaW4g dXMgaW4gcGVyc29uLiBIaXMgcHJlc2VudGF0aW9uIHdpbGwgcmV2b2x2ZSBhcm91bmQgdGhlIGNv bmNlcHQgb2YgJ25ldHdvcmsgc2VsZi1kZXRlcm1pbmF0aW9uJywgYnV0IHNvb24gaGUgd2lsbCB3 cml0ZSBzb21ldGhpbmcgYWJvdXQgdGhhdCBhcyBhbiBpbnRyb2R1Y3Rpb24gdG8gdGhpcyBsaXN0 Lg0KDQpIYXZlIGEgbG9vayBhdCBoaXMgYXJ0aWNsZSBhYm91dCB0aGlzIHRvcGljIGhlcmU6IGh0 dHA6Ly9iaWJsaW90ZWNhZGlnaXRhbC5mZ3YuYnIvZHNwYWNlL2hhbmRsZS8xMDQzOC8xOTkyNA0K DQpEaXJlY3QgUERGIGxpbms6IGh0dHA6Ly9iaWJsaW90ZWNhZGlnaXRhbC5mZ3YuYnIvZHNwYWNl L2JpdHN0cmVhbS9oYW5kbGUvMTA0MzgvMTk5MjQvTmV0d29yayUyMFNlbGYtRGV0ZXJtaW5hdGlv biUyMGFuZCUyMHRoZSUyMFBvc2l0aXZlJTIwRXh0ZXJuYWxpdGllcyUyMG9mJTIwQ29tbXVuaXR5 JTIwTmV0d29ya3MucGRmP3NlcXVlbmNlPTEmaXNBbGxvd2VkPXkNCg0KQWxsIHRoZSBiZXN0LA0K DQpOaWVscw0KDQoNCi0tDQoNCk5pZWxzIHRlbiBPZXZlcg0KUmVzZWFyY2hlciBhbmQgUGhEIENh bmRpZGF0ZQ0KRGF0YWN0aXZlIFJlc2VhcmNoIEdyb3VwDQpVbml2ZXJzaXR5IG9mIEFtc3RlcmRh bQ0KDQpQR1AgZmluZ2VycHJpbnQgICAgMjQ1OCAwQjcwIDVDNEEgRkQ4QSA5NDg4DQogICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgNjQzQSAwRUQ4IDNGM0EgNDY4QSBDOEIzDQoNCg0KX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCmhycGMgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQpocnBj QGlydGYub3JnPG1haWx0bzpocnBjQGlydGYub3JnPg0KaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaXJ0Zi5vcmcvbWFp bG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9ocnBjDQoNCg0KDQotLQ0KQ29yaW5uZSBDYXRoDQpQaC5ELiBDYW5kaWRh dGUsIE94Zm9yZCBJbnRlcm5ldCBJbnN0aXR1dGUgJiBBbGFuIFR1cmluZyBJbnN0aXR1dGUNCg0K V2ViOiB3d3cub2lpLm94LmFjLnVrL3Blb3BsZS9jb3Jpbm5lLWNhdGg8aHR0cDovL3d3dy5vaWku b3guYWMudWsvcGVvcGxlL2NvcmlubmUtY2F0aD4NCkVtYWlsOiBjY2F0aEB0dXJpbmcuYWMudWs8 bWFpbHRvOmNjYXRoQHR1cmluZy5hYy51az4gJiBjb3Jpbm5lY2F0aEBnbWFpbC5jb208bWFpbHRv OmNvcmlubmVjYXRoQGdtYWlsLmNvbT4NClR3aXR0ZXI6IEBDX0NhdGgNCg== --_000_4B6296ABAE1FC944984F6C9FE996FE19014AC7ACB8DC6010fgvbr_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWwgeG1sbnM6dj0idXJuOnNjaGVtYXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTp2bWwiIHhtbG5zOm89InVy bjpzY2hlbWFzLW1pY3Jvc29mdC1jb206b2ZmaWNlOm9mZmljZSIgeG1sbnM6dz0idXJuOnNjaGVt YXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTpvZmZpY2U6d29yZCIgeG1sbnM6bT0iaHR0cDovL3NjaGVtYXMubWlj cm9zb2Z0LmNvbS9vZmZpY2UvMjAwNC8xMi9vbW1sIiB4bWxucz0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy53My5vcmcv VFIvUkVDLWh0bWw0MCI+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIg Y29udGVudD0idGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjxtZXRhIG5hbWU9IkdlbmVyYXRv ciIgY29udGVudD0iTWljcm9zb2Z0IFdvcmQgMTUgKGZpbHRlcmVkIG1lZGl1bSkiPg0KPCEtLVtp ZiAhbXNvXT48c3R5bGU+dlw6KiB7YmVoYXZpb3I6dXJsKCNkZWZhdWx0I1ZNTCk7fQ0Kb1w6KiB7 YmVoYXZpb3I6dXJsKCNkZWZhdWx0I1ZNTCk7fQ0Kd1w6KiB7YmVoYXZpb3I6dXJsKCNkZWZhdWx0 I1ZNTCk7fQ0KLnNoYXBlIHtiZWhhdmlvcjp1cmwoI2RlZmF1bHQjVk1MKTt9DQo8L3N0eWxlPjwh W2VuZGlmXS0tPjxzdHlsZT48IS0tDQovKiBGb250IERlZmluaXRpb25zICovDQpAZm9udC1mYWNl DQoJe2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYW1icmlhIE1hdGgiOw0KCXBhbm9zZS0xOjIgNCA1IDMgNSA0IDYg MyAyIDQ7fQ0KQGZvbnQtZmFjZQ0KCXtmb250LWZhbWlseTpDYWxpYnJpOw0KCXBhbm9zZS0xOjIg MTUgNSAyIDIgMiA0IDMgMiA0O30NCkBmb250LWZhY2UNCgl7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6VmVyZGFuYTsN CglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDExIDYgNCAzIDUgNCA0IDIgNDt9DQovKiBTdHlsZSBEZWZpbml0aW9ucyAq Lw0KcC5Nc29Ob3JtYWwsIGxpLk1zb05vcm1hbCwgZGl2Lk1zb05vcm1hbA0KCXttYXJnaW46MGNt Ow0KCW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b206LjAwMDFwdDsNCglmb250LXNpemU6MTIuMHB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFt aWx5OiJUaW1lcyBOZXcgUm9tYW4iLHNlcmlmO30NCmE6bGluaywgc3Bhbi5Nc29IeXBlcmxpbmsN Cgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXByaW9yaXR5Ojk5Ow0KCWNvbG9yOmJsdWU7DQoJdGV4dC1kZWNvcmF0aW9u OnVuZGVybGluZTt9DQphOnZpc2l0ZWQsIHNwYW4uTXNvSHlwZXJsaW5rRm9sbG93ZWQNCgl7bXNv LXN0eWxlLXByaW9yaXR5Ojk5Ow0KCWNvbG9yOnB1cnBsZTsNCgl0ZXh0LWRlY29yYXRpb246dW5k ZXJsaW5lO30NCnNwYW4uaG9lbnpiDQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS1uYW1lOmhvZW56Yjt9DQpzcGFuLkVz dGlsb0RlRW1haWwxOA0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtdHlwZTpwZXJzb25hbC1yZXBseTsNCglmb250LWZh bWlseToiQ2FsaWJyaSIsc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsNCgljb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEO30NCi5Nc29DaHBEZWZh dWx0DQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS10eXBlOmV4cG9ydC1vbmx5Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYWxpYnJp IixzYW5zLXNlcmlmOw0KCW1zby1mYXJlYXN0LWxhbmd1YWdlOkVOLVVTO30NCkBwYWdlIFdvcmRT ZWN0aW9uMQ0KCXtzaXplOjYxMi4wcHQgNzkyLjBwdDsNCgltYXJnaW46NzAuODVwdCAzLjBjbSA3 MC44NXB0IDMuMGNtO30NCmRpdi5Xb3JkU2VjdGlvbjENCgl7cGFnZTpXb3JkU2VjdGlvbjE7fQ0K LS0+PC9zdHlsZT48IS0tW2lmIGd0ZSBtc28gOV0+PHhtbD4NCjxvOnNoYXBlZGVmYXVsdHMgdjpl eHQ9ImVkaXQiIHNwaWRtYXg9IjEwMjYiIC8+DQo8L3htbD48IVtlbmRpZl0tLT48IS0tW2lmIGd0 ZSBtc28gOV0+PHhtbD4NCjxvOnNoYXBlbGF5b3V0IHY6ZXh0PSJlZGl0Ij4NCjxvOmlkbWFwIHY6 ZXh0PSJlZGl0IiBkYXRhPSIxIiAvPg0KPC9vOnNoYXBlbGF5b3V0PjwveG1sPjwhW2VuZGlmXS0t Pg0KPC9oZWFkPg0KPGJvZHkgbGFuZz0iUFQtQlIiIGxpbms9ImJsdWUiIHZsaW5rPSJwdXJwbGUi Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iV29yZFNlY3Rpb24xIj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFu IGxhbmc9IkVOLVVTIiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtD YWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RDttc28tZmFyZWFzdC1sYW5ndWFn ZTpFTi1VUyI+VGhhbmsgeW91IHZlcnkgbXVjaCBmb3IgdGhlIHZlcnkga2luZCBpbnZpdGF0aW9u PG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gbGFuZz0i RU4tVVMiIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkm cXVvdDssc2Fucy1zZXJpZjtjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEO21zby1mYXJlYXN0LWxhbmd1YWdlOkVOLVVT Ij48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3Bh biBsYW5nPSJFTi1VUyIgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7 Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OyxzYW5zLXNlcmlmO2NvbG9yOiMxRjQ5N0Q7bXNvLWZhcmVhc3QtbGFuZ3Vh Z2U6RU4tVVMiPkZvciB0aG9zZSB3aG8gZG8gbm90IGhhdmUgdGltZSB0byByZWFkIHRoZSBwYXBl ciwgSSB3aWxsIHNoYXJlIGEgcG9zdCB3aXRoIHNvbWUgdGhvdWdodHMgb24gTmV0d29yayBTZWxm LWRldGVybWluYXRpb24sDQogdGhlIHdlZWsgYmVmb3JlIElFVEYgMTAxLjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9z cGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIGxhbmc9IkVOLVVTIiBzdHlsZT0i Zm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LHNhbnMtc2Vy aWY7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RDttc28tZmFyZWFzdC1sYW5ndWFnZTpFTi1VUyI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8 L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gbGFuZz0iRU4tVVMi IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDss c2Fucy1zZXJpZjtjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEO21zby1mYXJlYXN0LWxhbmd1YWdlOkVOLVVTIj5JIGFt IHZlcnkgbXVjaCBsb29raW5nIGZvcndhcmQgdG8gZGlzY3Vzc2luZyB0aGlzIHdpdGggeW91IGFu ZCBoZWFyaW5nIHlvdXIgZmVlZGJhY2s8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0i TXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBsYW5nPSJFTi1VUyIgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9u dC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OyxzYW5zLXNlcmlmO2NvbG9yOiMxRjQ5N0Q7bXNv LWZhcmVhc3QtbGFuZ3VhZ2U6RU4tVVMiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxw IGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIGxhbmc9IkVOLVVTIiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEx LjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7Y29sb3I6IzFG NDk3RDttc28tZmFyZWFzdC1sYW5ndWFnZTpFTi1VUyI+S2luZCByZWdhcmRzPG86cD48L286cD48 L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gbGFuZz0iRU4tVVMiIHN0eWxl PSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssc2Fucy1z ZXJpZjtjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEO21zby1mYXJlYXN0LWxhbmd1YWdlOkVOLVVTIj5MdWNhPG86cD48 L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gbGFuZz0iRU4tVVMi IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDss c2Fucy1zZXJpZjtjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEO21zby1mYXJlYXN0LWxhbmd1YWdlOkVOLVVTIj48bzpw PiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8dGFibGUgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbFRhYmxlIiBi b3JkZXI9IjAiIGNlbGxzcGFjaW5nPSIwIiBjZWxscGFkZGluZz0iMCIgd2lkdGg9IjAiIHN0eWxl PSJ3aWR0aDo0NTYuNzVwdCI+DQo8dGJvZHk+DQo8dHIgc3R5bGU9ImhlaWdodDo3OC4wcHQiPg0K PHRkIHdpZHRoPSIyOTgiIHJvd3NwYW49IjIiIHN0eWxlPSJ3aWR0aDoyMjMuNXB0O3BhZGRpbmc6 MGNtIDBjbSAwY20gMGNtO2hlaWdodDo3OC4wcHQiPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgYWxp Z249ImNlbnRlciIgc3R5bGU9InRleHQtYWxpZ246Y2VudGVyIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1z aXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7Y29s b3I6IzFGNDk3RCI+PGltZyB3aWR0aD0iMjk4IiBoZWlnaHQ9IjE0NiIgaWQ9Il94MDAwMF9pMTAy NiIgc3JjPSJodHRwOi8vd3d3LmZndi5ici9tYWlsaW5nL0RpcmVpdG9fUmlvL2Fzc2luYXR1cmFf ZW1haWwvTWFyY2FfRkdWX0RpcmVpdG9fUmlvLnBuZyIgYWx0PSJGR1YgRGlyZWl0byBSaW8iPjwv c3Bhbj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OyxzYW5zLXNl cmlmO2NvbG9yOiMxRjQ5N0QiPjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvdGQ+DQo8dGQgd2lk dGg9IjMxMSIgc3R5bGU9IndpZHRoOjIzMy4yNXB0O3BhZGRpbmc6MGNtIDBjbSAwY20gMGNtO2hl aWdodDo3OC4wcHQiPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9Im1hcmdpbi1sZWZ0OjMu N3B0Ij48Yj48c3BhbiBsYW5nPSJFTi1VUyIgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMC41cHQ7Zm9udC1m YW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7QXJpYWwmcXVvdDssc2Fucy1zZXJpZjtjb2xvcjojMDA4RUNGIj5MdWNhIEJl bGxpLCBQaEQ8L3NwYW4+PC9iPjxzcGFuIGxhbmc9IkVOLVVTIiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEw LjVwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtBcmlhbCZxdW90OyxzYW5zLXNlcmlmO2NvbG9yOiM2NjY2 NjYiPjxicj4NCjxpPlNlbmlvciBSZXNlYXJjaGVyIDwvaT48YnI+DQo8aT5IZWFkIG9mIDwvaT48 L3NwYW4+PGI+PGk+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMC41cHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1 b3Q7QXJpYWwmcXVvdDssc2Fucy1zZXJpZjtjb2xvcjojNjY2NjY2Ij48YSBocmVmPSJodHRwOi8v aW50ZXJuZXQtZ292ZXJuYW5jZS5mZ3YuYnIvIiB0YXJnZXQ9Il9ibGFuayI+PHNwYW4gbGFuZz0i RU4tVVMiIHN0eWxlPSJjb2xvcjojMDU2M0MxIj5JbnRlcm5ldCBHb3Zlcm5hbmNlIEAgRkdWPC9z cGFuPjwvYT48L3NwYW4+PC9pPjwvYj48Yj48aT48c3BhbiBsYW5nPSJFTi1VUyIgc3R5bGU9ImZv bnQtc2l6ZToxMC41cHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7QXJpYWwmcXVvdDssc2Fucy1zZXJpZjtj b2xvcjojNjY2NjY2Ij48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L2k+PC9iPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJN c29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0eWxlPSJtYXJnaW4tbGVmdDozLjdwdCI+PHNwYW4gbGFuZz0iRU4tVVMiIHN0 eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6OS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7QXJpYWwmcXVvdDssc2Fucy1z ZXJpZjtjb2xvcjojNjY2NjY2Ij5sdWNhLmJlbGxpQGZndi5icjwvc3Bhbj48c3BhbiBsYW5nPSJF Ti1VUyIgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMC41cHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7QXJpYWwmcXVv dDssc2Fucy1zZXJpZjtjb2xvcjojNjY2NjY2Ij48YnI+DQomIzQzOzU1IDIxIDM3OTkgPGI+NTc2 MzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9iPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0i bWFyZ2luLWxlZnQ6My43cHQiPjxiPjxpPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTAuNXB0O2Zv bnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0FyaWFsJnF1b3Q7LHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7Y29sb3I6IzY2NjY2NiI+PGEg aHJlZj0iaHR0cHM6Ly90d2l0dGVyLmNvbS8xbHVjYWJlbGxpIiB0YXJnZXQ9Il9ibGFuayI+PHNw YW4gbGFuZz0iRU4tVVMiIHN0eWxlPSJjb2xvcjojMDU2M0MxIj5AMWx1Y2FiZWxsaTwvc3Bhbj48 L2E+PC9zcGFuPjwvaT48L2I+PGI+PHNwYW4gbGFuZz0iRU4tVVMiIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6 MTAuNXB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0FyaWFsJnF1b3Q7LHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7Y29sb3I6IzY2 NjY2NiI+PG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9iPjwvcD4NCjwvdGQ+DQo8L3RyPg0KPHRyPg0KPHRk IHN0eWxlPSJwYWRkaW5nOjBjbSAwY20gMGNtIDBjbSI+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48 c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1 b3Q7LHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RCI+PGltZyBib3JkZXI9IjAiIHdpZHRoPSIyNjAi IGhlaWdodD0iNTgiIGlkPSJfeDAwMDBfaTEwMjUiIHNyYz0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy5mZ3YuYnIvbWFp bGluZy9EaXJlaXRvX1Jpby9hc3NpbmF0dXJhX2VtYWlsL09uZGFzLnBuZyIgYWx0PSJodHRwOi8v d3d3LmZndi5ici9tYWlsaW5nL0RpcmVpdG9fUmlvL2Fzc2luYXR1cmFfZW1haWwvT25kYXMucG5n Ij48L3NwYW4+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssc2Fu cy1zZXJpZjtjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L3RkPg0KPC90 cj4NCjwvdGJvZHk+DQo8L3RhYmxlPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9 ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OyxzYW5zLXNl cmlmO2NvbG9yOiMxRjQ5N0QiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNz PSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZx dW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssc2Fucy1zZXJpZjtjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEO21zby1mYXJlYXN0LWxh bmd1YWdlOkVOLVVTIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNv Tm9ybWFsIj48Yj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVv dDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LHNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPkRlOjwvc3Bhbj48L2I+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZv bnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OyxzYW5zLXNlcmlm Ij4gY2F0dGVrd2FhZEBnbWFpbC5jb20gW21haWx0bzpjYXR0ZWt3YWFkQGdtYWlsLmNvbV0NCjxi PkVtIG5vbWUgZGUgPC9iPkNvcmlubmUgQ2F0aDxicj4NCjxiPkVudmlhZGEgZW06PC9iPiBzZXh0 YS1mZWlyYSwgMjMgZGUgZmV2ZXJlaXJvIGRlIDIwMTggMTQ6MTA8YnI+DQo8Yj5QYXJhOjwvYj4g TmllbHMgdGVuIE9ldmVyICZsdDttYWlsQG5pZWxzdGVub2V2ZXIubmV0Jmd0Ozxicj4NCjxiPkNj OjwvYj4gSHJwYyAmbHQ7aHJwY0BpcnRmLm9yZyZndDs7IEx1Y2EgQmVsbGkgJmx0O2x1Y2EuYmVs bGlAZmd2LmJyJmd0Ozxicj4NCjxiPkFzc3VudG86PC9iPiBSZTogW2hycGNdIEx1Y2EgQmVsbGkg Y29uZmlybWVkIGFzIHNwZWFrZXI8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNv Tm9ybWFsIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1z b05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O1ZlcmRhbmEmcXVvdDssc2Fu cy1zZXJpZiI+R3JlYXQsIGxvb2tpbmcgZm9yd2FyZCB0byBpdCEgYmVzdCw8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwv c3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxv OnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPk9uIEZyaSwg RmViIDIzLCAyMDE4IGF0IDQ6MTcgUE0sIE5pZWxzIHRlbiBPZXZlciAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFp bHRvOm1haWxAbmllbHN0ZW5vZXZlci5uZXQiIHRhcmdldD0iX2JsYW5rIj5tYWlsQG5pZWxzdGVu b2V2ZXIubmV0PC9hPiZndDsgd3JvdGU6PG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8YmxvY2txdW90ZSBzdHls ZT0iYm9yZGVyOm5vbmU7Ym9yZGVyLWxlZnQ6c29saWQgI0NDQ0NDQyAxLjBwdDtwYWRkaW5nOjBj bSAwY20gMGNtIDYuMHB0O21hcmdpbi1sZWZ0OjQuOHB0O21hcmdpbi1yaWdodDowY20iPg0KPHAg Y2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9Im1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b206MTIuMHB0Ij5EZWFyIGFsbCw8 YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpEci4gTHVjYSBCZWxsaSBmcm9tIEJyYXppbCBjb25maXJtZWQgaGlzIGFiaWxp dHkgdG8gZ2l2ZSBhIHByZXNlbnRhdGlvbiBkdXJpbmcgaHJwYyBhdCBJRVRGMTAxLiBUaGVyZSBh cmUgZ29vZCBjaGFuY2VzIGhlIG1pZ2h0IGV2ZW4gam9pbiB1cyBpbiBwZXJzb24uIEhpcyBwcmVz ZW50YXRpb24gd2lsbCByZXZvbHZlIGFyb3VuZCB0aGUgY29uY2VwdCBvZiAnbmV0d29yayBzZWxm LWRldGVybWluYXRpb24nLCBidXQgc29vbiBoZSB3aWxsIHdyaXRlDQogc29tZXRoaW5nIGFib3V0 IHRoYXQgYXMgYW4gaW50cm9kdWN0aW9uIHRvIHRoaXMgbGlzdC48YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpIYXZlIGEg bG9vayBhdCBoaXMgYXJ0aWNsZSBhYm91dCB0aGlzIHRvcGljIGhlcmU6IDxhIGhyZWY9Imh0dHA6 Ly9iaWJsaW90ZWNhZGlnaXRhbC5mZ3YuYnIvZHNwYWNlL2hhbmRsZS8xMDQzOC8xOTkyNCIgdGFy Z2V0PSJfYmxhbmsiPg0KaHR0cDovL2JpYmxpb3RlY2FkaWdpdGFsLmZndi5ici9kc3BhY2UvaGFu ZGxlLzEwNDM4LzE5OTI0PC9hPjxicj4NCjxicj4NCkRpcmVjdCBQREYgbGluazogPGEgaHJlZj0i aHR0cDovL2JpYmxpb3RlY2FkaWdpdGFsLmZndi5ici9kc3BhY2UvYml0c3RyZWFtL2hhbmRsZS8x MDQzOC8xOTkyNC9OZXR3b3JrJTIwU2VsZi1EZXRlcm1pbmF0aW9uJTIwYW5kJTIwdGhlJTIwUG9z aXRpdmUlMjBFeHRlcm5hbGl0aWVzJTIwb2YlMjBDb21tdW5pdHklMjBOZXR3b3Jrcy5wZGY/c2Vx dWVuY2U9MSZhbXA7aXNBbGxvd2VkPXkiIHRhcmdldD0iX2JsYW5rIj4NCmh0dHA6Ly9iaWJsaW90 ZWNhZGlnaXRhbC5mZ3YuYnIvZHNwYWNlL2JpdHN0cmVhbS9oYW5kbGUvMTA0MzgvMTk5MjQvTmV0 d29yayUyMFNlbGYtRGV0ZXJtaW5hdGlvbiUyMGFuZCUyMHRoZSUyMFBvc2l0aXZlJTIwRXh0ZXJu YWxpdGllcyUyMG9mJTIwQ29tbXVuaXR5JTIwTmV0d29ya3MucGRmP3NlcXVlbmNlPTEmYW1wO2lz QWxsb3dlZD15PC9hPjxicj4NCjxicj4NCkFsbCB0aGUgYmVzdCw8YnI+DQo8YnI+DQpOaWVsczxi cj4NCjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJjb2xvcjojODg4ODg4Ij48YnI+DQo8YnI+DQo8c3BhbiBjbGFzcz0i aG9lbnpiIj4tLTwvc3Bhbj48YnI+DQo8YnI+DQo8c3BhbiBjbGFzcz0iaG9lbnpiIj5OaWVscyB0 ZW4gT2V2ZXI8L3NwYW4+PGJyPg0KPHNwYW4gY2xhc3M9ImhvZW56YiI+UmVzZWFyY2hlciBhbmQg UGhEIENhbmRpZGF0ZTwvc3Bhbj48YnI+DQo8c3BhbiBjbGFzcz0iaG9lbnpiIj5EYXRhY3RpdmUg UmVzZWFyY2ggR3JvdXA8L3NwYW4+PGJyPg0KPHNwYW4gY2xhc3M9ImhvZW56YiI+VW5pdmVyc2l0 eSBvZiBBbXN0ZXJkYW08L3NwYW4+PGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KPHNwYW4gY2xhc3M9ImhvZW56YiI+UEdQ IGZpbmdlcnByaW50Jm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAyNDU4IDBCNzAgNUM0QSBGRDhBIDk0ODg8L3NwYW4+ PGJyPg0KPHNwYW4gY2xhc3M9ImhvZW56YiI+Jm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZu YnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7ICZuYnNwOyAmbmJzcDsgJm5ic3A7NjQzQSAwRUQ4IDNGM0EgNDY4 QSBDOEIzPC9zcGFuPjxicj4NCjxicj4NCjwvc3Bhbj48YnI+DQpfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXzxicj4NCmhycGMgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0PGJyPg0K PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOmhycGNAaXJ0Zi5vcmciPmhycGNAaXJ0Zi5vcmc8L2E+PGJyPg0KPGEg aHJlZj0iaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaXJ0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9ocnBjIiB0YXJnZXQ9 Il9ibGFuayI+aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaXJ0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9ocnBjPC9hPjxv OnA+PC9vOnA+PC9wPg0KPC9ibG9ja3F1b3RlPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFs Ij48YnI+DQo8YnIgY2xlYXI9ImFsbCI+DQo8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFz cz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1z b05vcm1hbCI+LS0gPG86cD48L286cD48L3A+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0K PGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8 cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7VmVyZGFu YSZxdW90OyxzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj5Db3Jpbm5lIENhdGggPGJyPg0KUGguRC4gQ2FuZGlkYXRlLCBP eGZvcmQgSW50ZXJuZXQgSW5zdGl0dXRlICZhbXA7IEFsYW4gVHVyaW5nIEluc3RpdHV0ZSA8YnI+ DQo8YnI+DQo8c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iY29sb3I6IzQ0NDQ0NCI+V2ViOiA8YSBocmVmPSJodHRwOi8v d3d3Lm9paS5veC5hYy51ay9wZW9wbGUvY29yaW5uZS1jYXRoIiB0YXJnZXQ9Il9ibGFuayI+DQp3 d3cub2lpLm94LmFjLnVrL3Blb3BsZS9jb3Jpbm5lLWNhdGg8L2E+IDxicj4NCkVtYWlsOiA8YSBo cmVmPSJtYWlsdG86Y2NhdGhAdHVyaW5nLmFjLnVrIiB0YXJnZXQ9Il9ibGFuayI+Y2NhdGhAdHVy aW5nLmFjLnVrPC9hPiAmYW1wOw0KPGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOmNvcmlubmVjYXRoQGdtYWlsLmNv bSIgdGFyZ2V0PSJfYmxhbmsiPmNvcmlubmVjYXRoQGdtYWlsLmNvbTwvYT48YnI+DQpUd2l0dGVy OiBAQ19DYXRoPC9zcGFuPjwvc3Bhbj48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8 L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwv ZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2JvZHk+DQo8L2h0bWw+DQo= --_000_4B6296ABAE1FC944984F6C9FE996FE19014AC7ACB8DC6010fgvbr_-- From nobody Tue Feb 27 00:47:04 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 075751200B9 for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 00:47:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6LATzQ_tBBQ1 for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 00:47:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from ayla.bortzmeyer.org (ayla.bortzmeyer.org [IPv6:2001:4b98:dc0:41:216:3eff:fe27:3d3f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DCD681267BB for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 00:46:59 -0800 (PST) Received: by ayla.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id 5FEDCA277F; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 09:46:56 +0100 (CET) Received: by godin (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D8062EC0BB6; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 09:46:47 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 09:46:47 +0100 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <20180227084647.GA572@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Transport: UUCP rules X-Operating-System: Ubuntu 16.04 (xenial) X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Archived-At: Subject: [hrpc] Programmer's Oath X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 08:47:03 -0000 I don't think is was mentioned here. It is an attempt to develop a "Programmer's Oath" like the oath for doctors. So it seems relevant here: https://github.com/Widdershin/programmers-oath From nobody Tue Feb 27 01:12:48 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B1441274D2 for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 01:12:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eU3_dDd8wCAO for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 01:12:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from ayla.bortzmeyer.org (ayla.bortzmeyer.org [IPv6:2001:4b98:dc0:41:216:3eff:fe27:3d3f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1399127337 for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 01:12:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by ayla.bortzmeyer.org (Postfix, from userid 10) id 37716A277F; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 10:12:40 +0100 (CET) Received: by godin (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 617F2EC0BB6; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 10:05:00 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 10:05:00 +0100 From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <20180227090500.GA1055@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> References: <20180227084647.GA572@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180227084647.GA572@laperouse.bortzmeyer.org> X-Transport: UUCP rules X-Operating-System: Ubuntu 16.04 (xenial) X-Charlie: Je suis Charlie User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] Programmer's Oath X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 09:12:47 -0000 On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 09:46:47AM +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote a message of 5 lines which said: > I don't think is was mentioned here. It is an attempt to develop a > "Programmer's Oath" like the oath for doctors. So it seems relevant here: > > https://github.com/Widdershin/programmers-oath Apparently, it is not the first attempt: https://github.com/larswirzenius/HippocraticOathForIT From nobody Tue Feb 27 07:48:40 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63EAB12DA29 for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 07:48:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pIKqtTDtv3h7 for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 07:48:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D70E12DA28 for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 07:48:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eqhUY-0000AE-S2 for hrpc@irtf.org; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 16:48:35 +0100 To: "hrpc@irtf.org" From: Niels ten Oever Message-ID: Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 16:48:34 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Authenticated-As-Hash: f1842a279235a42f6aa2a2a81130733515c5a4ec X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Scan-Signature: 7b320cd02cd98c580351ccd23ba1512a Archived-At: Subject: [hrpc] At Least 21 European Languages in Danger of Digital Extinction X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 15:48:39 -0000 Might be relevant for the discussion we had earlier about Internationalization. Press Release: http://www.meta-net.eu/whitepapers/press-release White papers for several languages: http://www.meta-net.eu/whitepapers/overview Guardian article: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/feb/26/icelandic-language-battles-threat-of-digital-extinction Best, Niels From nobody Tue Feb 27 08:09:19 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FC08126C22 for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 08:09:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.586 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.586 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=0.723, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=open-xchange.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7dHbbML5vHOV for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 08:09:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx4.open-xchange.com (alcatraz.open-xchange.com [87.191.39.187]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3567A1243FE for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 08:09:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from open-xchange.com (imap.open-xchange.com [10.20.30.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx4.open-xchange.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C2226A24B; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 17:09:15 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=open-xchange.com; s=201705; t=1519747755; bh=altl12zlN6Mv8PNX5I6P9ilkrSD2wUsXFgh6iSrYQ6A=; h=Date:From:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From; b=tapdLuVvn7iidttxxUbVeL38d7ZSvcnmjtXKSXBqyt/5PsIfq9zQ72ogI3ySsHMEX DRPA3DjVUldLuX1vPg0SS4cnnFXf4M0TlOm/ZcPNnljXXkpnxziWrSNhjgN83SJJXz +uTbtnZG4b0D6+9mzmjLA6lbalzRnqNpZYyDKuzeuGuvt6IbIdoT+jt9LYQfunzijY eTJ31Pm8IafPow6YKaCUDfca4A4vnZQ8HTCc7jxvxe9ACNJjAQW4O9Y7G9F837jN4q W9+bYsH6fcRsGAMh1EqtY4lf4iiNRuKc8QiOjJKGtupbSnosG41tnpoEQuHpxHSYry AENO0oKCNhxSw== Received: from null (appsuite-gw2.open-xchange.com [192.168.110.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by open-xchange.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 00BE53C00DC; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 17:09:14 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 17:09:14 +0100 (CET) From: Vittorio Bertola To: Niels ten Oever , hrpc@irtf.org Message-ID: <1659154448.785.1519747754745@appsuite.open-xchange.com> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 Importance: Medium X-Mailer: Open-Xchange Mailer v7.8.4-Rev23 X-Originating-Client: open-xchange-appsuite Archived-At: Subject: Re: [hrpc] At Least 21 European Languages in Danger of Digital Extinction X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 16:09:18 -0000


Il 27 febbraio 2018 alle 16.48 Niels ten Oever ha scritto:


Might be relevant for the discussion we had earlier about
Internationalization.

There actually are in Europe several more languages (e.g. most of the ancient regional Italian languages) that are so near to extinction that they do not even have the availability of enough researchers to write a whitepaper that claims that they are near to extinction :-)

It would be nice to see more efforts on this, though, in the long term, the digitalization-globalization trend will likely anglicize almost everything.

Arvëdse,

-- 

Vittorio Bertola | Head of Policy & Innovation, Open-Xchange
vittorio.bertola@open-xchange.com 
Office @ Via Treviso 12, 10144 Torino, Italy
From nobody Tue Feb 27 15:21:44 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: hrpc@irtf.org Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DB6112EB76; Tue, 27 Feb 2018 15:11:28 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "\"IETF Secretariat\"" To: , Cc: hrpc@irtf.org, irtf-chair@irtf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.73.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <151977308811.5200.8973852414302442326.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 15:11:28 -0800 Archived-At: Subject: [hrpc] hrpc - Requested session has been scheduled for IETF 101 X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 List-Id: "mail@nielstenoever.net" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 23:11:28 -0000 Dear Niels ten Oever, The session(s) that you have requested have been scheduled. Below is the scheduled session information followed by the original request. hrpc Session 1 (2:00:00) Thursday, Afternoon Session II 1550-1750 Room Name: Viscount size: 175 --------------------------------------------- Request Information: --------------------------------------------------------- Working Group Name: Human Rights Protocol Considerations Area Name: IRTF Session Requester: Niels ten Oever Number of Sessions: 1 Length of Session(s): 2 Hours Number of Attendees: 80 Conflicts to Avoid: First Priority: quic httpbis saag dnsop Second Priority: irtfopen Third Priority: gaia People who must be present: Avri Doria Niels ten Oever Resources Requested: Special Requests: Preferably Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday and not Friday. ---------------------------------------------------------