Paul Hoffman wrote: > Sorry, I hope that others reading my message understood it better. Paul, I still don't understand. The first sentence in your original email was: > Please note that you are now also collecting information that > *is not* on the current blue sheets, namely > "company/organization affiliation". I thought that was the "problem" to which you were alluding. And my question remains: Is there any evidence that participants in IETF should not provide their company/organization affiliation when they participate? Is there something to hide? I appreciate and respect the following comment, also in your email: > As a person with multiple company/organization affiliations, I sometimes > change the email address I put on the blue sheets to be the one most > appropriate to the topic of the WG. But that is not an excuse to provide no affiliation whatsoever, if you have one (or many). Also, what is the "revolt" you are expecting in your email? I've reread this entire thread about "IETF 76 Meeting Registration" and can't figure out who or what you find revolting about meeting registration data being collected by IETF? I'm sorry if I'm just being dense. /Larry -----Original Message----- From: Paul Hoffman [mailto:paul.hoffman@xxxxxxxx] Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 10:18 AM To: Lawrence Rosen; 'Alexa Morris' Cc: 'IETF-Discussion' Subject: RE: Important Information about IETF 76 Meeting Registration At 10:08 AM -0700 8/31/09, Lawrence Rosen wrote: >Paul Hoffman wrote: >> There are probably a dozen WGs in the IETF who have had this problem come >> back and bite them on their collective backsides during protocol >development >> or, unfortunately, after their protocols have deployed. > >Can you give examples of how providing "company/organization affiliation" >has caused bites to the backside during protocol development/deployment? >Were the bites well-deserved? Sorry, I hope that others reading my message understood it better. By "this problem" I meant the bit just before what you quoted: "data that differs depending on the collection method". A few examples would be IDNs collected from DNS responses vs. user input, MIME headers that get "fixed" in various transports, IP addresses that differ depending on which side of the NAT you collect them, and so on. --Paul Hoffman, Director --VPN Consortium _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf