Subject: [HT-rt] [[email-masked]: Call for Comment: <draft-iab-marnew-report-01> (IAB Workshop on Managing Radio Networks in an Encrypted World (MaRNEW) Report)]

From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2018 17:36:08 +0200

Obvious HR consequences. Any volunteer?

Subject: Call for Comment: <draft-iab-marnew-report-01> (IAB Workshop on Managing Radio Networks in an Encrypted World (MaRNEW) Report)
From: IAB Executive Administrative Manager <[email-masked]>
To: "IETF Announcement List" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2018 15:08:39 -0700
List-Id: "IETF announcement list. No discussions." <ietf-announce.ietf.org>

This is an announcement of an IETF-wide Call for Comment on 
draft-iab-marnew-report-01.

The document is being considered for publication as an Informational RFC 
within the IAB stream, and is available for inspection at:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-iab-marnew-report/

The Call for Comment will last until 2018-05-01. Please send comments to
[email-masked] and [email-masked].

Abstract

   The MarNEW workshop aimed to discuss solutions for bandwidth
   optimisation on mobile networks for encrypted content, as current
   solutions rely on unencrypted content which is not indicative of the
   security needs of today's Internet users.  The workshop gathered IETF
   attendees, IAB members and various organisations involved in the
   telecommunications industry including original equipment
   manufacturers and mobile network operators.

   The group discussed the current Internet encryption trends and
   deployment issues identified within the IETF, and the privacy needs
   of users which should be adhered.  Solutions designed around sharing
   data from the network to the endpoints and vice versa were then
   discussed as well as analysing whether the current issues experienced
   on the transport layer are also playing a role here.  Content
   providers and CDNs gave an honest view of their experiences delivery
   content with mobile network operators.  Finally, technical responses
   to regulation was discussed to help the regulated industries relay
   the issues of impossible to implement or bad-for-privacy technologies
   back to regulators.

   A group of suggested solutions were devised which will be discussed
   in various IETF groups moving forward.

---

From: Shivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2018 20:43:08 +0000

I could take a look, if someone could work with me.

On Sat, Apr 7, 2018, 11:36 AM Stephane Bortzmeyer <[email-masked]> wrote:

> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> To: IETF Announcement List <[email-masked]>
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Subject: Call for Comment: <draft-iab-marnew-report-01> (IAB Workshop on
> Managing Radio Networks in an Encrypted World (MaRNEW) Report)
> _______________________________________________
> HR-rt mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hr-rt
>

---

From: Niels ten Oever <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2018 12:30:12 +0200

Amelia know more about radio networks than I do methinks, but happy to do so if Amelia is not available. 

Cheers,

Niels

⁣Sent from Blue ​

On Apr 7, 2018, 22:43, at 22:43, Shivan <[email-masked]> wrote:
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

---

From: Amelia Andersdotter <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2018 22:19:43 +0200

I guess the task is to apply the Human Rights Guidelines from RFC 8280?

It's a workshop. As I read the draft report GSMA is defending their
regulatory and commercial interests, and IETF is saying "well, make it
work while stuff is encrypted".

So do we mean to criticize GSMA's self-perceived political/commercial
interests from a HR perspective?

====

The workshop appears not to have touch on the upcoming ePrivacy
regulation in the EU at all, in spite of it having a fairly big impact
on many GSMA members. In particular, GSMA has been lobbying /against/
the ePrivacy regulation, in spite of the IETF helpfully solving many of
their regulatory challenges under the law.

Telcos are in the place where they want to sell amounts of data. HTTPS
increases the amount of data, making telco consumer potentially
unhappier. Encryption can also slow stuff down, and while some vendors
say that that's an issue of the past, it's possible that it isn't in for
instance the developing world. Probably Facebook Free Basic connections
have data on this.

In some countries, notably the UK, telcos may be under obligation to
generally filter connections (ensure they're porn-free). I find that
policy disagreeable, but nevertheless it's there. For telcos it's a
challenge.

In Sweden, before the EU open internet regulation entered into effect,
several telcos were investigated for traffic prioritisation (which was
suspected to run contrary to ePrivacy directive obligations not to
monitor traffic). Ironically, the EU open internet law kind of permitted
commercially motivated traffic discrimination so those inquiries have
since been cancelled. The new ANACOM case in Portugal may change this
interpretation of what the open internet regulation says, but I don't
perceive Portugal to be heading in that direction.

best regards,

Amelia

On 2018-04-08 12:30, Niels ten Oever wrote:
> Sent from Blue <http://www.bluemail.me/r?b=12687>
> On Apr 7, 2018, at 22:43, Shivan <[email-masked]
> <mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
>
>     On Sat, Apr 7, 2018, 11:36 AM Stephane Bortzmeyer
>     <[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
>
>         From: IAB Executive Administrative Manager <[email-masked]
>         <mailto:[email-masked]>>
>         To: IETF Announcement List <[email-masked]
>         <mailto:[email-masked]>>
>         Cc: 
>         Bcc: 
>         Subject: Call for Comment: <draft-iab-marnew-report-01> (IAB
>         Workshop on Managing Radio Networks in an Encrypted World
>         (MaRNEW) Report)
>         [email-masked]
>         <mailto:[email-masked]> and [email-masked]
>         <mailto:[email-masked]>.
>
>
>         Abstract
>
>         [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>

-- 
Amelia Andersdotter
Technical Consultant, Digital Programme

ARTICLE19
www.article19.org

PGP: 3D5D B6CA B852 B988 055A 6A6F FEF1 C294 B4E8 0B55

---

From: Niels ten Oever <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 13:42:42 +0200

Hi Amelia,

> I guess the task is to apply the Human Rights Guidelines from RFC 8280?

Rather the guidelines doc:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-hrpc-guidelines-00

And feedback any potentially useful changes.

> interests from a HR perspective?

We seek to understand the potential impact for the ability of end-users
to excercise their human rights, a consequence for that could be to
criticize the proposed architectural reordering.

> their regulatory challenges under the law.

Interesting - this could fall under the privacy part.

> increases the amount of data, making telco consumer potentially

decreases, right?

> policy disagreeable, but nevertheless it's there. For telcos it's a

This has an impact on FoE. I don't think we need to have an opinion on
everything from the get-go, but rather show the (potential) implications.

Cheers,

Niels

---

From: Amelia Andersdotter <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 19:23:46 +0200

How easiest to draft?

i started something here:
https://github.com/nllz/IRTF-HRPC/pull/221/files#diff-989e50ba297c8bab8fe8fbd3759ac6d2

there's some semantics in this (first), and then i started the
evaluation by removing those considerations that i thought were either
already addressed, or that would best be addressed elsewhere.

i find it ironic that the telcos don't want to share their APIs /with
their own customers and users(!)/ out of competition concerns. normally,
i'm the customer of by telco, i don't compete with it.

but a big problem in the mobile markets could then be that vertically
integrated operators can be both mobile OS or mobile app providers /and/
Mobile Network Operators at the same time. Oh, if only the telcos had
lobbied for a competetitve market regulation(!) how many of their
current predicaments (and also end-user human rights concerns) could be
solved. but ok.

/end whiny transmission

amelia

ARTICLE19
www.article19.org

---

From: Niels ten Oever <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2018 11:07:47 +0200

Hi Amelia,

We don't need a specific format, we can simply send an email with the
review.

Cheers,

Niels

---

From: Amelia Andersdotter <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2018 18:27:37 +0200

Hi Niels,

Ok, so to clarify is the general points brought up in the text along
what was expected? Some of the stuff could be footnoted. Putting it in
e-mail format is smaller challenge.

I thought github could be a collaborative way of ensuring many people
could contribute to the text (such as Shivan).

A very simple feedback would be to just include the list of HR concerns
that /were/ included in the workshop, and which ones /weren't/.

best regards,

Amelia

ARTICLE19
www.article19.org

---

From: Shivan <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2018 00:03:54 -0700

We could use GitHub to format our *email* reply - doesn't need to be in the
draft format.

In the context of this draft, where our criticism could perhaps be valuable
is Section 7; I am inclined to agree with their principles, not so much
with their proposed solutions. Some suggestions put forth are vague and
handwavy, which makes it hard to comment on. I have some notes I'll type up
and comment on Amelia's PR.

On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 9:27 AM, Amelia Andersdotter <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> >>>>> Amelia know more about radio networks than I do methinks, but happy
> to
> >>>>> do so if Amelia is not available.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Niels
> >>>>>
> >>>>>            providers and CDNs gave an honest view of their
> experiences
> >>>>>         delivery