Re: [Geopriv] I-D Action: draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity-01.txt
Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> Wed, 13 February 2013 15:31 UTC
Return-Path: <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B05DB21F86D8 for <geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 07:31:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ez3ZBedk0pCl for <geopriv@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 07:31:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shaman.nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F58E21F86C8 for <geopriv@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 07:31:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from unnumerable.tekelec.com ([4.30.77.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by shaman.nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id r1DFV3rx003941 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 13 Feb 2013 09:31:03 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com)
Message-ID: <511BB1B9.8080402@nostrum.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 09:31:05 -0600
From: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ray Bellis <Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk>
References: <20130213110454.30575.87864.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <53F00E5CD8B2E34C81C0C89EB0B4FE73104FE0B7@wds-exc1.okna.nominet.org.uk>
In-Reply-To: <53F00E5CD8B2E34C81C0C89EB0B4FE73104FE0B7@wds-exc1.okna.nominet.org.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received-SPF: pass (shaman.nostrum.com: 4.30.77.1 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism)
Cc: "geopriv@ietf.org WG" <geopriv@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Geopriv] I-D Action: draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity-01.txt
X-BeenThere: geopriv@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Geographic Location/Privacy <geopriv.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 15:31:09 -0000
I'll request IETF LC on this version. Everyone please note carefully the strengthening of the deprecation in this change. If you are not ok with the SHOULD NOT -> MUST NOT change, speak up during IETF LC. RjS On 2/13/13 5:35 AM, Ray Bellis wrote: > On 13 Feb 2013, at 11:04, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: > >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. >> This draft is a work item of the Geographic Location/Privacy Working Group of the IETF. >> >> Title : Flow Identity Extension for HELD >> Author(s) : Ray Bellis >> Filename : draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-identity-01.txt >> Pages : 14 >> Date : 2013-02-13 >> > I've submitted this version in response to AD and proto writeup comments, mostly around how it updates RFC 6155. > > The abstract has been rewritten somewhat to make it clearer, and to explicitly mention that this document deprecates the port elements from RFC 6155. > > What was the final paragraph of §3 has been moved into the Introduction and rewritten thus: > > Since the Location Recipient may not know in advance whether the > Target is behind a NAT device the port number elements from Section > 3.3 of [RFC6155] are deprecated and MUST NOT be used. This document > provides a more generally applicable means of identifying a Device > based on the parameters of a network flow of which it is an endpoint. > > Alissa had proposed the following text in her proto writeup: > > "It updates RFC 6155 to include this extension ..." > > I've explicitly *not* included such text because technically this document is a *new* extension, not an addition to the RFC 6155 schema. > > Ray > > _______________________________________________ > Geopriv mailing list > Geopriv@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
- [Geopriv] I-D Action: draft-ietf-geopriv-flow-ide… internet-drafts
- Re: [Geopriv] I-D Action: draft-ietf-geopriv-flow… Ray Bellis
- Re: [Geopriv] I-D Action: draft-ietf-geopriv-flow… Robert Sparks
- Re: [Geopriv] I-D Action: draft-ietf-geopriv-flow… Winterbottom, James