Re: IAB statement on draft-farrell-perpass-attack-00

What do "adequately address pervasive monitoring in HTTP/2.0" and "we'll
very likely get knocked back for it" mean?


On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 4:08 PM, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:

> FYI. If this gains IETF consensus (and every indication is that it will),
> it will impact our work, in that if we don't adequately address pervasive
> monitoring in HTTP/2.0, we'll very likely get knocked back for it.
>
> If you have input, please send it to ietf@ietf.org or perpass@ietf.org.
>
> Cheers,
>
> P.S. The link is: <
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-farrell-perpass-attack-00>
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> > From: IAB Chair <iab-chair@iab.org>
> > Subject: IAB statement on draft-farrell-perpass-attack-00
> > Date: 28 November 2013 3:13:02 am AEDT
> > To: IETF Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
> > Cc: IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
> > Reply-To: IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
> >
> > At the Vancouver IETF meeting, the IAB held a technical plenary that
> discussed pervasive monitoring.  The IAB believes that pervasive monitoring
> represents an attack on the Internet in as much as large amounts of
> information that is intended to be confidential between sets of individuals
> is in fact gathered and aggregated by third parties.  Such a broad scale
> attack can undermine confidence in the infrastructure, no matter the intent
> of those collecting the information.
> >
> > draft-farrell-perpass-attack-00 is intended to establish an IETF
> community consensus on this matter.  We encourage the community to read and
> engage in discussion about this draft, and also to take practical measures
> to limit pervasive monitoring within their environments.
> >
> > On behalf of the IAB,
> >  Russ Housley
> >  IAB Chair
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
>
>
>
>
>