Subject: RE: [Raven] Re: Thoughts of IESG and IAB members on Raven

From: Jim Gillogly <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 20:14:47 +0000

Brian Rosen wrote:
> All I have at the moment is a vaguely stated requirement.  
>
> The only question before the group is whether we do anything
> in support of legal intercept.
>
> Those two things match.  First we find out if we can do anything.
> Then we get to the what exactly part.

Not quite.  The questions before the group is whether we <should>
develop new protocols or modify existing ones to support internet
wiretap, and what should be the IETF's position on informational
docs that say how to do internet wiretap without protocol mods.

So rather than "first we find out if we can do anything" the
order is "first we find out whether we <should> do anything."
This discussion's charter has nothing to do with whether we
<can> do anything.

If we <should> support internet wiretap in any way, it would be
because of a real requirement of some kind.  A "vaguely stated
requirement" based on an unsupported extension of a related law
in one country that happens to support a lot of IETF engineers
does not yet rise to the level of a real requirement.

If somebody knows a legal or other compelling reason that we
should be supporting internet wiretaps, speak up... but be sure
to keep it as international as IETF.
-- 
	Jim Gillogly
	Mersday, 16 Foreyule S.R. 1999, 20:00
	12.19.6.13.14, 9 Ix 2 Mac, Fourth Lord of Night

_______________________________________________
raven mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/raven

---

From: Ed Stone <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 06 Dec 1999 15:29:10 -0500

>to keep it as international as IETF.

Precisely!
--
--------------------------
Ed Stone
[email-masked]
--------------------------