IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Geopriv] GEOPRIV minutes from IETF 76

"Thomson, Martin" <Martin.Thomson@andrew.com> Fri, 13 November 2009 08:08 UTC

Return-Path: <Martin.Thomson@andrew.com>
X-Original-To: geopriv@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: geopriv@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F69F3A6980 for <geopriv@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Nov 2009 00:08:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.572
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.572 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.027, 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 uwlS7YoU+WAg for <geopriv@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Nov 2009 00:08:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from csmailgw2.commscope.com (csmailgw2.commscope.com [198.135.207.244]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B7713A67C1 for <geopriv@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Nov 2009 00:08:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.86.20.102] ([10.86.20.102]:37299 "EHLO ACDCE7HC1.commscope.com") by csmailgw2.commscope.com with ESMTP id S72483AbZKMIJV (ORCPT <rfc822; geopriv@ietf.org>); Fri, 13 Nov 2009 02:09:21 -0600
Received: from SISPE7HC1.commscope.com (10.97.4.12) by ACDCE7HC1.commscope.com (10.86.20.102) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.393.1; Fri, 13 Nov 2009 02:09:20 -0600
Received: from SISPE7MB1.commscope.com ([fe80::9d82:a492:85e3:a293]) by SISPE7HC1.commscope.com ([fe80::8a9:4724:f6bb:3cdf%10]) with mapi; Fri, 13 Nov 2009 16:09:19 +0800
From: "Thomson, Martin" <Martin.Thomson@andrew.com>
To: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <drage@alcatel-lucent.com>, "Winterbottom, James" <James.Winterbottom@andrew.com>, Richard Barnes <rbarnes@bbn.com>, "geopriv@ietf.org" <geopriv@ietf.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 16:09:50 +0800
Thread-Topic: [Geopriv] GEOPRIV minutes from IETF 76
Thread-Index: AcpkBbDb6vyBRBACQByc1iXFMnWDHQAB3vrTAAgJBKAAAsjfoA==
Message-ID: <8B0A9FCBB9832F43971E38010638454F0F35CCD2@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com>
References: <E9220853-FAB5-4867-A75B-F0CE20C79F56@bbn.com> <5A55A45AE77F5941B18E5457ECAC8188011EB8E6DAB5@SISPE7MB1.commscope.com> <EDC0A1AE77C57744B664A310A0B23AE209324F19@FRMRSSXCHMBSC3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com>
In-Reply-To: <EDC0A1AE77C57744B664A310A0B23AE209324F19@FRMRSSXCHMBSC3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BCN: Meridius 1000 Version 3.4 on csmailgw2.commscope.com
X-BCN-Sender: Martin.Thomson@andrew.com
Subject: Re: [Geopriv] GEOPRIV minutes from IETF 76
X-BeenThere: geopriv@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Geographic Location/Privacy <geopriv.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv>, <mailto:geopriv-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/geopriv>
List-Post: <mailto:geopriv@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:geopriv-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv>, <mailto:geopriv-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 08:08:52 -0000

There was general agreement that LCP cases could be included - providing that these were described in sufficient detail.  The concern was with the amount detail for LCP in the current draft.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: geopriv-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:geopriv-bounces@ietf.org] On
> Behalf Of DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
> Sent: Friday, 13 November 2009 4:15 PM
> To: Winterbottom, James; Richard Barnes; geopriv@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Geopriv] GEOPRIV minutes from IETF 76
> 
> This is a working group document.
> 
> It does not have authors.
> 
> It has editors who work to WG concensus. What was the WG consensus?
> 
> regards
> 
> Keith
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: geopriv-bounces@ietf.org
> > [mailto:geopriv-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Winterbottom, James
> > Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 2:58 AM
> > To: Richard Barnes; geopriv@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [Geopriv] GEOPRIV minutes from IETF 76
> >
> >
> >
> > 4. HELD Identity Extensions
> >    draft-ietf-geopriv-held-identity-extensions
> > Martin Thomson presented an update on this document.  The
> > primary open issues are around how authentication and
> > authorization are applied.
> > Cullen Jennings expressed concern that current text on
> > authenticating ownership of identifiers is not implementable.
> >  The authors agreed to restrict usage to limited cases with
> > pre-configured authorization relationships, except possibly
> > for some cases the document can provide clear, implementable
> guidance.
> >
> > [AJW] Absolutely NOT TRUE! I voiced a very strong protest to
> > this in the jabber room. I agree to this ONLY for the
> > identifiers that cannot have an explicitly verifiable link
> > back to the Target IP address. I have provided one very good
> > example of where this is the case. I will look at the others
> > and see if there are similar scenarios. But please, the
> > comment above about the author's agreeing is false and what
> > is stated was not the outcome.
> >
> > Cheers
> > James
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Geopriv mailing list
> > Geopriv@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Geopriv mailing list
> Geopriv@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status