Hiya, On 05/09/2022 13:38, Ted Hardie wrote: > In short, I oppose this, and I think the working group should simply avoid > work in this area completely; it is fraught with pitfalls. If you must do > work in the area, start from the right place, which is a privacy-preserving > architecture. Get to the header format at the*end* of that process. I generally agree with Ted on the above, and the rest of his mail. I'm not so sure though that the experience since the geopriv WG shows that attempting a similar process again would be that productive either. Were work on this topic to proceed, I'd argue that would need to start from a public analysis of the IMO currently fairly awful situation with respect to location privacy, with an aim of achieving overall improvement. I'd argue that would require a BoF at least, as there are many different angles and starting positions IETF participants would likely want included in such a discussion. Cheers, S.
Received on Monday, 5 September 2022 14:42:09 UTC