--On Sunday, September 13, 2009 22:00 -0700 Ole Jacobsen <ole@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > John, > > With all due respect: The WIDE folks, host of IETF 76, have > offered to showcase a technology that is being used > increasingly for all kinds of things including public > transportation system, door entry, and various other > interesting applications. We've labelled this as an experiment > and we've given everyone the option to NOT participate and > we've encouraged a discussion of the many issues surrounding > privacy and security that might arise by deploying such > technology. We've also, with the help of the host, outlined > some of the technical details and received feedback that I am > sure will help improve many operational and privacy/security > aspects of the experiment, details of which are being > designed as we speak. As you know, Asia in general and Japan > in particular is very high-tech and I am sure most IETF > attendees will find the experiment interesting. Yes. But, as to the substance, I think Eric's comments are very relevant here. As I pointed out in my note to Don, this ceases to be a "host experiment" as soon as the IASA gets involved, and the IASA certainly appears to be involved... and is making policy decisions without adhering to what I believe to be the requirements for IASA policy decisions. There are countries in which the use of security cameras is very widespread too, but I wouldn't expect the IETF --the same IETF that has occasionally taken very strong positions against bans on encryption technologies to protect privacy -- to endorse them. To be clear, I think it is entirely reasonable for a host to propose something like this, either as a "technology demonstration" or as an "experiment" (I think of the two as different; YMMD). I think it is entirely reasonable for the IASA to say "tentatively ok" without turning that into a big deal or public process, and make an announcement to the community about the plan, and I see that as having been done. But when, after the announcement, when the community expresses considerable concerns, I expect the IASA (and, as appropriate the sponsor) to engage directly on the questions and to treat the decisions as a policy matter in which the community has to be involved. And that is different from saying "it is an experiment", "...help improve many operational and privacy/security aspects of the experiment", without any signs of being willing to entertain the null hypothesis of "maybe this isn't a good idea without time and resources for more consideration and openness". >... > Just to be clear, the IAOC did not initiate the RFID > experiment, and you are correct that the community did not > ask for it. The WIDE folks are working very hard to provide us > with a great meeting, and as part of this effort they are > showcasing some cool technologies. The RFID system is one such > technology. But, as I said to Don, not a technology demonstration that the IASA needs to facilitate on the one hand and then pretend does not involve policy decisions about secretariat and other involvements on the other. john _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf