[paws] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-paws-protocol-19: (with COMMENT)

"Alissa Cooper" <alissa@cooperw.in> Wed, 24 September 2014 23:02 UTC

Return-Path: <alissa@cooperw.in>
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 43CB41A01AE; Wed, 24 Sep 2014 16:02:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8] autolearn=no
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 LaDxMPEBL0EW; Wed, 24 Sep 2014 16:02:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C2D61A1AD7; Wed, 24 Sep 2014 16:02:15 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: "Alissa Cooper" <alissa@cooperw.in>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 5.6.3
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <20140924230215.24240.81110.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 16:02:15 -0700
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/paws/Mkk-4KHlZj5TrDZNvyrR9qglDQY
Cc: paws@ietf.org, paws-chairs@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-paws-protocol@tools.ietf.org
Subject: [paws] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-paws-protocol-19: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: paws@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 23:02:18 -0000

Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-paws-protocol-19: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-paws-protocol/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for all your work to address my DISCUSS!

= Shepherd write-up=
"An in-depth review by a JSON expert might be useful." 

Did that happen?

= Section 1 =
"It opens the door for innovations in spectrum
   management that can incorporate a variety of parameters, including
   user location and time.  In the future, it also can include other
   parameters, such as user priority, time, signal type and power,
   spectrum supply and demand, payment or micro-auction bidding, and
   more."

Time seems to be listed both as a current parameter and a future one,
which is confusing.

= Section 4.4 =
"FCC rules, for example, require that a 'Fixed Device'
   register its owner and operator contact information, its device
   identifier, its location, and its antenna height."
   
It would be nice to have a citation for the rules referenced here.

= Section 5.1 =
Feel free to ignore this if it's completely misguided, but does altitude
really not matter? Are we sure this protocol won't be re-used for devices
on airplanes trying to find available spectrum? (I note that in RFC 6953,
requirement D.1 specifies that the data model must support "the height
and its uncertainty" -- I have no idea what "the height" means or if it
is related to altitude.)

= Section 10 =
I agree with Stephen that the database operator should be considered as a
potential adversary from the standpoint of potentially being able to
create a fine-grained database that tracks the locations and spectrum use
patterns of individual devices. That data could certainly be abused.