[Ecrit] DISCUSS on draft-ietf-ecrit-location-hiding-req

"Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)" <hannes.tschofenig@nsn.com> Sun, 21 February 2010 08:15 UTC

Return-Path: <hannes.tschofenig@nsn.com>
X-Original-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ecrit@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C63328C11E for <ecrit@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Feb 2010 00:15:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.564
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.564 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.035, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Wg5yrm9r7NTw for <ecrit@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Feb 2010 00:15:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (demumfd002.nsn-inter.net [93.183.12.31]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5610D28C0FC for <ecrit@ietf.org>; Sun, 21 Feb 2010 00:15:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from demuprx017.emea.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.129.56]) by demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id o1L7SlaM016671 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sun, 21 Feb 2010 08:28:47 +0100
Received: from demuexc023.nsn-intra.net (demuexc023.nsn-intra.net [10.150.128.36]) by demuprx017.emea.nsn-intra.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id o1L7SlKp027235; Sun, 21 Feb 2010 08:28:47 +0100
Received: from FIESEXC015.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.0.23]) by demuexc023.nsn-intra.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sun, 21 Feb 2010 08:28:47 +0100
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 09:27:19 +0200
Message-ID: <3D3C75174CB95F42AD6BCC56E5555B450238916E@FIESEXC015.nsn-intra.net>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: DISCUSS on draft-ietf-ecrit-location-hiding-req
Thread-Index: Acqya383u4Rj+LeJRz+YtV8tzvFVug==
From: "Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)" <hannes.tschofenig@nsn.com>
To: tim.polk@nist.gov
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Feb 2010 07:28:47.0405 (UTC) FILETIME=[817B2DD0:01CAB2C7]
Cc: ecrit@ietf.org
Subject: [Ecrit] DISCUSS on draft-ietf-ecrit-location-hiding-req
X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ecrit.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ecrit>
List-Post: <mailto:ecrit@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 08:15:49 -0000

Hi Tim, 

You wrote: 
"
I may be missing something, but it seems that these requirements should
be in addition to the requirements specified in
[I-D.ietf-geopriv-lbyr-requirements].
The document does not say that anywhere, and the specification of
[I-D.ietf-geopriv-lbyr-requirements] as informative adds to my
confusion.
"

I guess I know where your comment comes from. You have looked at the
security consideration section and it essentially points to another
document and that document is only in the informative references
section. 

I guess I have two options: 
* move the reference into the normative section 
* copy the text and adjust it

Did I correctly understood the root of your concern? What approach of
addressing your comment would you prefer? 

Ciao
Hannes