On 15/03/16 14:13, Eliot Lear wrote: > By providing the chaff We are not doing that. We are providing our usual web site is all. That we need to turn off an additional control added by CF is not the same as actively providing cover traffic. > we are making a moral decision to > help those who use Tor. Have we done so consciously and is it the right > one? I don't think we (the IETF) need to decide that. We need to decide to re-level the field for exit nodes so that people who access the IETF site via those hosts aren't discommoded. Speaking personally, I'd answer your question with a yes, but not on moral grounds, rather because Tor is one of the most widely used privacy enhancing technologies; the IETF should encourage use of such so that we learn how to make privacy better on the Internet, so therefore we should, I think, be actively encouraging its use so we learn more about it. I don't think the IETF has established that as a consensus position, but nor should we have to. It's fairly obvious I reckon. I'd also say yes on moral grounds as it happens, but one yes should be enough for everyone except Molly Bloom:-) Cheers, S.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature