[dns-operations] IP address encryption: pseudonymization

Paul Wouters paul at nohats.ca
Mon Feb 12 04:30:31 UTC 2018

On Sun, 11 Feb 2018, bert hubert wrote:

> A standard is something people can adhere to

I would call that a specification.

> to enhance interoperability.

Well, I'd say to go from "non-interoperable solutions invented here" to

> I personally have no interest in dragging this through the IETF at this
> point.  It is a traumatizing experience of uncertain benefit.

It is indeed work. I am sorry you hear that you don't feel up for the
task to bring this to a greater audience. Maybe someone else who is a
better fit at working together with engineers within the IETF can be
of help.

> https://twitter.com/fugueish/status/959877791289257984 summarises this
> pretty well:
> "The IETF is not for:
> * cryptography
> * protocol design
> Do not use it for those things.".

if you think this is a good summary of what work the IETF does and what
it should or shouldn't do, then I think I know why you got traumatized :)

> I do hope people will comment however on the current state of the document.

See, if you would bring it to the IETF, you would have people looking at
the current document. You would have reviews Working Group members, from
review groups such as SecDir, GenArt, etc and you could even bring it to
the IRTF people such as the Human Rights Protocol Considerations Research
Group and CFRG to get even more people to comment on your specification.

Yes, that is more work then writing a specification yourself and hoping
people will find it, review it, and publish it somewhere obvious where
other people can find it so they are not going to re-invent the wheel.


More information about the dns-operations mailing list