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