[DMM] Mirja Kühlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-dmm-4283mnids-04: (with DISCUSS)

["Mirja Kuehlewind" <[e-mail]>]

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-dmm-4283mnids-04: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dmm-4283mnids/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I would realy like to see the following changes in the security
considerations section:
OLD
"If used in the MNID extension as defined in this
   document, the packet including the MNID extension should be
encrypted
   so that personal information or trackable identifiers would not be
   inadvertently disclosed to passive observers."
NEW
"If used in the MNID extension as defined in this
   document, the packet including the MNID extension SHOULD be
encrypted
   so that personal information or trackable identifiers would not be
   inadvertently disclosed to passive observers."
Or even better make it a MUST? Is there a reason for only having a
SHOULD?

as well as the following change:
OLD
"Moreover, MNIDs containing sensitive identifiers might only be used
   for signaling during initial network entry. "
NEW
"Moreover, MNIDs containing sensitive identifiers MUST only be used
   for signaling during initial network entry and MUST NOT be leaked to
   other networks."