Re: Reviving discussion on error code 451

Hi,

On 12/18/14 9:28 AM, Tim Bray wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 11:57 PM, Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com
> <mailto:ynir.ietf@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     There is some suggestion in the draft for trying to work around
>     the blockage. I don’t like technical documents suggesting things
>     that could be illegal in some places, but whatever response (using
>     TOR, using VPN, complaining to the government or the server admin,
>     or protesting) is something that the user can do. The computer
>     cannot fix the issue by itself. This is different from 410 and 404
>     where we don’t think the user can do much anyway.
>
>
> ​Yes.  It does feel like, for completeness, the draft should point out
> that there are technical countermeasures available to route around
> legal blockages - this information is useful to anyone considering
> these issues from any angle.  But, unlike Eliot, I don’t think RFCs
> should prescribe reactions to civic-society issues. 

Well (a) you are not to be believed- that you don't think RFCs should
prescribe reactions to civil-society issues, based on your previous
support of other work, not to mention THIS draft; and (b) I actually
made no such statement as the above about this draft, and believe the
exact opposite.  I did, however, ask questions in order to understand
what programmatic behavior you expect in reaction to this response code
that would differ from at least one existing response code.  To me at
least, that's what these low level HTTP response codes are for, and I
probed whether the code could be generalized.  You, on the other hand,
seem to want to politicize the matter.

Eliot