> > The IETF position on LI is not exactly that it's anathema, but that we > will not standardise *any* intercept techniques, legal or otherwise. RFC > 2804. > > > Regards, > Brian Carpenter > (via tiny screen & keyboard) > > On Fri, 9 Jul 2021, 18:33 Stewart Bryant, <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Unfortunately LI is not our call. > > I know the IETF finds it an anathema but it is an unspoken (in IETF) > reality of the telecommunications industry. > > The concept of a huge number of highly portable, highly directional, > microwave links that are then relayed opaquely to a foreign country is > going to delight some agencies and give heartburn to their colleagues in > other parts of the same agency cluster. > > I think that we can all postulate how this would (will) be solved in a > mega-cluster owned by a large ITU region 2 country, or a particularly large > Asian country but I assume we want to design a global / universal system > rather than one that will otherwise inevitably be partitioned due to > geo-political security concerns. > > Stewart > > Sent from my iPad > > >
_______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
