Cisco Architecture for Lawful Intercept in IP Networks
Draft of message to be sent after approval:
From: The IESG <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: RFC Editor <email@example.com> Cc: The IESG <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: Informational RFC to be: draft-baker-slem-architecture-03.txt The IESG has no problem with the publication of 'Cisco Support for Lawful Intercept In IP Networks' <draft-baker-slem-architecture-03.txt> as an Informational RFC. The IESG would also like the IRSG or RFC-Editor to review the comments in the datatracker (https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=10167&rfc_flag=0) related to this document and determine whether or not they merit incorporation into the document. Comments may exist in both the ballot and the comment log. The IESG contact person is Steve Bellovin. A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-baker-slem-architecture-03.txt The process for such documents is described at http://www.rfc-editor.org/indsubs.html. Thank you, The IESG Secretary
Technical Summary In some countries, service providers must have a facility for "lawful intercept" -- i.e., officially-authorized wiretaps -- of IP content. This document describe's Cisco's architecture for providing that functionality. Working Group Summary The notion of lawful intercept is controversial, from both a political and technical perspective. However, this document describes one vendor's implementation; it is not an IETF standard. Protocol Quality Steven Bellovin has reviewed this document for the IESG. RFC Editor Note: Please add the following text: The IESG wishes to draw the reader's attention to RFC 2804 for a description of why architectures such as these are vendor-specific, rather than a topic of standardization for the IETF. just before the Section 1.1 header. In addition, please add the standard IESG isclaimer for individual submissions.