Re: [cti-stix] Deterministic IDs - pas de deux

[Trey Darley <trey@soltra.com>]

On 05.05.2016 19:11:37, Patrick Maroney wrote:
> 
> The proposed Deterministic ID concept has been mis-characterized,
> and rejected on this basis from the beginning. However, the
> discourse (before yesterday's attempt to shut down active
> discussions amongst other voices in the community) has surfaced a
> much bigger issue from my perspective.
> 

Hey, Pat -

I'm sorry to hear that you feel your input has been suppressed. From
where I sit, there's been a long and healthy discussion around the
concept of deterministic identifiers. Personally, I wish we could do
them for a handful of interesting applications, but after going back
and forth at great length, it just doesn't appear to be practical.

The TC is a democratic body. Sometimes democratic bodies take
decisions we disagree with as individuals. Take, for example, the CTI
Common ballot measure I put forward. I was flabbergasted at the level
of opposition to something that seemed so obvious to me, but I didn't
take it personally. That's just how democracy works.

> 
> Fait Accompli - consider me disengaged.
> 

Please don't go, Pat. The TC as a whole would be measurably
impoverished by the loss of your input.

-- 
Cheers,
Trey
--
Trey Darley
Senior Security Engineer
4DAA 0A88 34BC 27C9 FD2B  A97E D3C6 5C74 0FB7 E430
Soltra | An FS-ISAC & DTCC Company
www.soltra.com
--
"It is easier to move a problem around (for example, by moving the
problem to a different part of the overall network architecture) than
it is to solve it." --RFC 1925

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature