Hi Masataka, On 20.09.2013 16:06, Masataka Ohta wrote: > (2013/09/20 21:15), Jari Arkko wrote: >> Josh, Stephen, >> >> It is important to understand the limitations of technology in this >> discussion. We can improve communications security, and in some >> cases reduce the amount information communicated. But we cannot >> help a situation where you are communicating with a party that >> you cannot entirely trust with technology alone. > > We can discourage people communicating with a party that are > under full control of USG, which is why using cloud services > should be discouraged, which is a technical issue.
An open standardization process means that everyone can participate, including people who work for the government (directly or indirectly). Whether you like what someone is putting forward is a completely different story but I hope you would at least look at the content before judging it. So, I believe this attitude against people and companies who may have had, or still have relationships with governments is counterproductive. On your argument against cloud standardization in the IETF I have two remarks, namely : * Cloud services (with whatever definition you use) indeed presents challenges for privacy and security. * There is no standardization in the IETF on something like the "cloud". On the other hand I have to say that almost every protocol we standardize in the IETF could be used in a cloud service. For example, many cloud services use HTTP. Should we stop working on HTTP? Ciao Hannes > > Masataka Ohta
