W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2015

Re: SSL/TLS everywhere fail

From: Phil Hunt <phil.hunt@oracle.com>
Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2015 17:25:42 -0800
Cc: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>, Jacob Appelbaum <jacob@appelbaum.net>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Cory Benfield <cory@lukasa.co.uk>, Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com>, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz>, httpbis mailing list <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <78CC807A-0D6A-4206-9493-F0ECAD4E1A0B@oracle.com>
To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Let’s terminate this thread *please*.  It simply is not relevant to the HTTP WG.


> On Dec 6, 2015, at 5:09 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> wrote:
> --------
> In message <5664CDDB.4070108@cs.tcd.ie>, Stephen Farrell writes:
>> Please look at the ~1000 messages in the ietf@ietf.org archive on
>> the topic of that draft. Please consider the (video or whatever
>> form of reporting you prefer of the) technical plenary at IETF-88
>> with about 1000 people in the room who also expressed that same
>> consensus. (Albeit less precisely, which was the point of getting
>> the RFC done.)
> The goals to be aimed for should certainly be a consensus decision,
> and such "wide" processes are the norm:  General assemblies and
> political party congresses etc.
> BCP188 is typical for the outcome of such "wide" processes, and
> similar lofty ambitions and language can be found in pretty much
> any party or NGO platform document anywhere in the world.
> The actual strategy for getting to those goals is usually laid down
> by a much smaller group, taking into account the realities of the
> battles to be fought and the relative strengths and weaknesses of
> the opposition to be overcome.
> IETF does not seem to have done that.
> There are many valid and sound arguments why IETF should not or
> even can not have a "central committee" or "leadership" of kind
> which usually responsible for laying the strategy.
> But lacking both leadership and strategy makes IETF, as organization,
> totally unsuited to take on all the worlds governments in a fight
> to win a basic human right of privacy.
> ...which is what BCP188 attempts to commit IETF to do.
> Amnesty International and similar human rights organizations would
> be much better vehicles than IETF can ever be.
> Poul-Henning
> -- 
> Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
> phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
> FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
> Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Monday, 7 December 2015 01:26:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:40 UTC