Re: [perpass] comments and questions for the group on draft-farrell-perpass-attack-02

[Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>]

Robin,

On 12/9/13 2:00 PM, Robin Wilton wrote:
> Eliot, 
>
> I think your second edit is probably too broad, in the sense that it could create quite a lot of room for abuse. You currently have:
>
>>>   More limited-scope monitoring or other services or to assist with
>>> network operations that
>>>   is required in order to operate the network or an application is not
>>>   considered pervasive monitoring
> I would suggest something along the following lines. The first part is just a rewording of your text; the part in square brackets is prompted by what I think we can learn from existing approaches to pervasive monitoring.
>
> Where monitoring is of limited scope, or services in support of network operations are required in order to operate the network, these are not necessarily to be considered de facto pervasive monitoring [; however, thought should be given to whether they enable pervasive monitoring, either directly or as a by-product of their primary purpose].
>

Your alternative would be fine with me.

Eliot