idnits 2.17.1
draft-elris-hrpc-righttolife-00.txt:
Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see
https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info):
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
No issues found here.
Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
No issues found here.
Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist :
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
No issues found here.
Miscellaneous warnings:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
== The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not
match the current year
-- The document date (August 5, 2018) is 2091 days in the past. Is this
intentional?
Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
(See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references
to lower-maturity documents in RFCs)
No issues found here.
Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 1 warning (==), 1 comment (--).
Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about
the items above.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 INTERNET-DRAFT N. Elkins
3 Intended Status: Proposed Standard EDCO
4 W. Jouris
5 EDCO
6 Expires: February 6, 2019 August 5, 2018
8 Right to Life Issues in Internet Content and Protocols
9 draft-elris-hrpc-righttolife-00
11 Abstract
13 This document proposes a new IANA registry of Guidance for Blocked
14 Content. Blocked Content is content which has no significant valid
15 use and conflicts with the "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" .
16 The format of the proposed registry is provided, and some initial
17 categories; for example, human trafficking and 3d printed guns.
19 Status of this Memo
21 This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
22 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
24 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
25 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
26 other groups may also distribute working documents as
27 Internet-Drafts.
29 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
30 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
31 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
32 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
34 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
35 http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html
37 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
38 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
40 Copyright and License Notice
42 Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
43 document authors. All rights reserved.
45 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
46 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
47 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
48 publication of this document. Please review these documents
49 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
50 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
51 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
52 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
53 described in the Simplified BSD License.
55 Table of Contents
57 1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
58 1.1 Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
59 2 Blocked Content Guidance Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
60 2.1 Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
61 2.2 Content Type Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
62 2.3 Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
63 3 Initial Values for Blocked Content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
64 4 Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
65 5 IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
66 5.1 New Namespace Assignments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
67 5.2 New Blocked Content Guidance Registry . . . . . . . . . . . 5
68 6 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
69 6.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
70 6.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
71 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
73 1 Introduction
75 [RFC3552] provides guidance to protocol designers about both how to
76 consider security as part of protocol design and how to inform
77 readers of protocol specifications about security issues. [RFC6973]
78 provides guidelines for considering privacy in protocol design.
79 [RFC3935] in Section 4 states "The Internet isn't value-neutral, and
80 neither is the IETF."
82 This document provides guidance to content providers on what content
83 to block based on the right to life and safety. This registry
84 should contain very few elements. The right to freedom of speech
85 and expression is one of the most sacrosanct rights of mankind. Only
86 the most egregious violations, which threaten the life and safety of
87 individuals should be on this registry.
89 The right to life is one of the basic functions of government. One
90 of the best known sentences in the English language is from the
91 [INDEC] Declaration of Independence of the United States of America,
92 it is as follows: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all
93 men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with
94 certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and
95 the pursuit of Happiness." This right is also stated in the
96 Universal Declaration of Human Rights [UDHR] in Article 3 as
97 "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person. The
98 Universal Declaration of Human Rights [UDHR] is one of the documents
99 cited in the charter of this Working Group as a foundational
100 document.
102 Today, quite a few governments are able to effectively control their
103 borders such that guns are not readily available to their populace.
104 Many studies show that the availability of guns is correlated with
105 violence and death: all of which take away the right to life of
106 individuals.
108 In the past 20 years, technology has been moving at a rate that
109 policy cannot keep up. Nor do all policy makers understand the
110 implications of technology or the technology and protocols
111 themselves.
113 The impetus to the creation of this document, however, is far
114 simpler. With the advent of specific and detailed plans for guns
115 readily available on the Internet to be printed using a 3D printer, a
116 line has been crossed. We must create some common sense limits on
117 the rights to post any content whatsoever on the Internet.
119 This document is organized as follows. Section 2 describes an IANA
120 registry to serve as a guidance for content providers to block
121 content. Section 3 describes some proposed initial values for
122 blocked content.
124 1.1 Terminology
126 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
127 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
128 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
130 2 Blocked Content Guidance Registry
132 2.1 Identifier
134 A numeric identifier for the Blocked Content Type. This identifier
135 MUST be unique within the Blocked Content Guidance Registry.
137 The identifier is a 16-bit integer (range 0 to 65535).
139 The Identifier 0 should be Reserved.
141 When adding newly registered Blocked Content to the Blocked Content
142 Registry, IANA should assign the lowest available identifier to the
143 next content type.
145 2.2 Content Type Name
147 As the name of the Content Type is the first thing a potential human
148 will use when determining whether it is to be blocked or already
149 blocked, it is important to be as precise and descriptive as
150 possible. In future, users will review the names to determine if the
151 content they want to block has already been registered, or if a
152 similar entry is available as a basis for creating a new entry.
154 2.3 Description
156 This is a full description of the type of content to be blocked. It
157 is a maximum of 1024 characters.
159 3 Initial Values for Blocked Content
161 Identifier: 01
162 Content Type Name: 3d_Printed_guns
163 Description: Detailed and specific instructions on how to
164 print a working gun or parts via a 3d printer
166 Identifier: 02
167 Content Type Name: Slavery
168 Description: Descriptions of human beings with or without
169 prices offered for sale with contact information
170 on how to perform such a transaction
172 4 Security Considerations
174 In terms of protocols, no new security vulnerabilities are introduced
175 as a result of this document.
177 5 IANA Considerations
179 This document requests the following IANA Actions.
181 5.1 New Namespace Assignments
183 This document requests the allocation of the URI prefix
184 urn:ietf:blocked for the purpose of generating URIs for blocked
185 content in general.
187 5.2 New Blocked Content Guidance Registry
189 This document specifies the procedure for the Blocked Content
190 Registry setup. IANA is requested to create a new registry for
191 Blocked Content called "Guidance to Blocked Content". This Registry
192 will contain the following Summary columns:
194 Identifier:
196 Content Type Name:
198 Description:
200 Descriptions of these columns and additional information found in the
201 template for registry entries (categories and columns) are further
202 defined in section 2.
204 6 References
206 6.1 Normative References
208 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
209 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997
211 [RFC3552] Rescorla, E. and B. Korver, "Guidelines for Writing RFC
212 Text on Security Considerations", BCP 72, RFC 3552, July 2003.
214 [RFC3935] Alvestrand, H, "A Mission Statement for the IETF", RFC3935,
215 October, 2004
217 6.2 Informative References
219 [INDEC] Jefferson, T, et al, "Declaration of Independence", 1776,
220
222 [UDHR] United Nations, "Universal Declaration of Human Rights", 1948,
223 .
226 [RFC6973] Cooper, A. et al, "Privacy Considerations for Internet
227 Protocols", RFC6973, July, 2013
229 Authors' Addresses
231 Nalini Elkins
232 Enterprise Data Center Operators (EDCO)
233 EMail: nalini.elkins@e-dco.com
235 William Jouris
236 Enterprise Data Center Operators (EDCO)
237 email: william.jouris@e-dco.com