Re: [Mobopts] Review of draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions-06

On 11/6/07 4:06 PM, "ext Vijay Devarapalli"
<vijay.devarapalli@AzaireNet.com> wrote:

>> 
>> The pseudo HoA changing at each run of the RR provides some protection
>> against profiling. Change of CoA upon handover, or a new CoA nonce index or
>> a new RFC 3041 style CoA configuration makes a round of RR to be run. The
>> pseudo HoA itself is not inducing new signaling, but a few computational
>> steps.
> 
> Ok, but I am questioning the need for changing the pseudo home
> address every time the return routability signaling is done
> (every 420 seconds).
> 

Look at it this way: it does not cost signaling-wise; few computational
steps and provides protection against profiling. Probably more headache to
not compute pseudo HoA for this case alone..

>> Actually, there is a new Type number for the Destination Option containing
>> the pseudo HoA, so that the CN can first compute the String and recover the
>> HoA.
> 
> Ok, got it. You would need add this new destination option to
> the IANA considerations section. It is empty currently.
> 

Yes.

> 
> How is the information about the encryption algorithm conveyed?

The default should be specified and assumed. There is no additional
signaling imagined for now.

> More fundamental than that. Why would the mobile node want to use a
> pseudo home address with its home agent?
> 

Let's look at this in the other thread.

-Rajeev
-- 
http://people.nokia.net/~rajeev

> Vijay
> 
>> 
>> Thanks for the review.
>> 
>> -Rajeev
> 

_______________________________________________
Mobopts mailing list
Mobopts@irtf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mobopts