IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [paws] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-paws-protocol-14: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com> Thu, 21 August 2014 15:59 UTC

Return-Path: <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
X-Original-To: paws@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: paws@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F1001A03FE; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 08:59:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.668
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.668 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jy6_h2-3H-_u; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 08:59:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wolverine02.qualcomm.com (wolverine02.qualcomm.com [199.106.114.251]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11E4D1A037E; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 08:59:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=qti.qualcomm.com; i=@qti.qualcomm.com; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1408636781; x=1440172781; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to; bh=Exm+TGPqrngpaqNPjC+rLINE1dnyViUHKklDThHy79A=; b=Q7X7AZSdOUdD4fcEyEm0UWU7gQqg9YfGLj1aHduWn361oyCTaJxkROBT PiNrSp2ObgRzrXEOPJyMHUthvZAADiZ4tEYhcIQ0ZpKcZjext/MtJ4fH6 jTTjDOhk7Ch2JdPMuNRV28eGPaWSPLq+vlJMOAPuJ5gsVsl26SxmdxICb 0=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5600,1067,7536"; a="151100492"
Received: from ironmsg04-l.qualcomm.com ([172.30.48.19]) by wolverine02.qualcomm.com with ESMTP; 21 Aug 2014 08:59:40 -0700
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.01,909,1400050800"; d="scan'208,217";a="695892734"
Received: from nasanexhc04.na.qualcomm.com ([172.30.48.17]) by Ironmsg04-L.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-SHA; 21 Aug 2014 08:59:39 -0700
Received: from presnick-mac.local (172.30.48.1) by qcmail1.qualcomm.com (172.30.48.17) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.181.6; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 08:59:39 -0700
Message-ID: <53F61768.7030007@qti.qualcomm.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 10:59:36 -0500
From: Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100630 Eudora/3.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Vincent Chen <vchen@google.com>
References: <20140820165236.31862.86067.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CABEV9ROW=KhQDCU5=X+SrtPAAOwd0QgvKJh_-owQ4b1CvdNvog@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABEV9ROW=KhQDCU5=X+SrtPAAOwd0QgvKJh_-owQ4b1CvdNvog@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------090700000409000106020000"
X-Originating-IP: [172.30.48.1]
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/paws/7mmV3-F7lg2SMUHqMFnI3dwzT1Y
Cc: "paws@ietf.org" <paws@ietf.org>, "paws-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <paws-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-paws-protocol@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [paws] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-paws-protocol-14: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: paws@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Protocol to Access White Space database \(PAWS\)" <paws.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/paws>, <mailto:paws-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/paws/>
List-Post: <mailto:paws@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:paws-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws>, <mailto:paws-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 15:59:45 -0000

On 8/21/14 2:59 AM, Vincent Chen wrote:
>
>     = Section 5.2 =
>     I'd like to discuss why the device serial number needs to be
>     included in
>     the device descriptor, rather than some (perhaps persistent) randomly
>     generated device identifier that is used only in the context of this
>     protocol (which would better protect the privacy of the user of the
>     device, since the whitespaces database administrator wouldn't be
>     able to
>     correlate the device's spectrum requests with other activities
>     linked to
>     the serial number). It's not really clear why serial number is
>     collected
>     since both this document and RFC 6953 note the protocol does not
>     defend
>     against abuse or mis-use of spectrum.
>
>
> The regulator want to have the ability to black list ranges of serial 
> numbers, if it
> determines that a series was defective. The Databases must use the 
> serial number
> to determine it can return available spectrum.

But that makes this a "required by ruleset but not by protocol" issue, 
right?

pr

-- 
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email