I just want to submit a draft to make the world a little better. I did
this individually without an employer in the background and on my own. I
just followed the already existing RFC from Sally, I even wrote to her
(unfortunately the email came back). I don't have to have my name all
over the internet and I don't want to. I also could have done a better
job of disguising the fact that it's not my real name. The IETF can
hardly control this at all.
I could take a very common name and maybe many have already done that.
Just from the individual email I know that IETF has very poor spam
protection and for that reason alone you end up in a lot of spam lists
and very quickly. I only want to establish a new webiquette as I see a
lot of issues at in the internet at the moment.
On 17.04.22 21:14, Christian Huitema wrote:
This submission raises an interesting question for the IETF: how to
treat anonymous (or pseudonymous) submissions?
On one hand, there are lots of classic reasons for hiding behind a
pseudonym when participating in public discussions. On the other hand,
the IETF has to be protected against intellectual property issues and
against sabotage by external groups.
Before submissions are accepted for publication, their authors have to
disclose whether they, or their employer, own intellectual property
rights on the technologies described in the draft. Failure to disclose
would influence the prosecution of intellectual property disputes that
might arise when third parties implement the technology. This provides
some degree of protection to implementers. But when the submission
cannot be traced to a specific company, these protections disappear,
and we might have a problem. So this is one source of tension between
standards and anonymity.
The other source of tension is the risk of sabotage. Various groups
have tried to sabotage the standard process in the past, for example
to delay the deployment of encryption, or to introduce exploitable
bugs in security standards -- some of these tactics were exposed in
the Snowden revelations. Anonymous participation could allow these
groups to perform such sabotage in untraceable ways, which is
obviously not desirable.
I think this issue of anonymous participation is worth discussing.
-- Christian Huitema
On 4/17/2022 11:35 AM, kate_9023+...@systemli.org wrote:
Dear all,
I'm quite new at creating RFCs. I have recently submitted a draft for
a new webiquette and I am still searching a group which will take
care of it. It would fit into privacy as this new webiquette is
dealing with new internet technology such as deepfakes, sharing
photos of 3rd parties and so on and also deleting old information on
a regular basis good behavior. It's also quite short with only 9
pages and also covers cancel culture and mobbing. I think a document
like this is needed and important. Anyone here who'd like to take
care or helping me making an RFC out of it? Or guide me in the right
direction?
The draft can be found here:
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-rfcxml-general-the-new-webiquette-00.txt
Best Regards,
Kate
_______________________________________________
ietf-privacy mailing list
ietf-privacy@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-privacy
_______________________________________________
ietf-privacy mailing list
ietf-privacy@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-privacy
_______________________________________________
ietf-privacy mailing list
ietf-privacy@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-privacy
