[Ecrit] Re: [Geopriv] New draft on Secure Location Objects

Richard,

your author group may benefit from perusing the ECRIT and GEOPRIV  
mailing list archives, as they discuss many of these issues in depth.  
Unfortunately, issues such as what it means to sign a location (how  
can the receiver tell who can legitimately sign for an unknown user's  
location?) do not seem to be reflected in your draft. Given the long  
and contentious debates on these topics, it would seem helpful to  
avoid having them again, so I think you could do the working groups a  
favor by reflecting those discussions in your draft. If you're able  
to summarize and reflect on those issues, your draft could be  
potentially useful to move the discussion forward, rather than just  
having the same discussion again.

Many of these items are already discussed in the L7 and conveyance  
document, so it might be useful to reduce the overlap.

Henning

On Nov 3, 2006, at 6:41 PM, Richard L. Barnes wrote:

> The issue of the security of location information in the GEOPRIV  
> architecture has gotten a lot of discussion, so we wanted to  
> examine some ways that security features might be embedded in  
> location objects.
>
> The internet-drafts queue seems to be saturated, so please find  
> draft-barnes-geopriv-secure-location-object-00.txt attached.
>
> Cheers,
> --Richard
>
>
>
> Network Working Group                                          R.  
> Barnes
> Internet-Draft                                               M.  
> Lepinski
> Intended status: Informational                                  R.  
> Watro
> Expires: April 27, 2007                                 BBN  
> Technologies
>                                                         October 24,  
> 2006
>
>
>                         Secure Location Objects
>              draft-barnes-geopriv-secure-location-object-00

_______________________________________________
Ecrit mailing list
Ecrit@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit