Re: [Pidloc] New Version Notification for draft-iannone-pidloc-privacy-00.txt

Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com> Tue, 28 January 2020 21:12 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <157985487134.22081.1953062526439829970.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAC8QAcfmeJ+87dj6C-XqNqNbxXTKupfhKT5WcneY2i8irq8ajg@mail.gmail.com> <ce26322e-2f7e-d1c1-f196-d66dcf739af9@joelhalpern.com>
In-Reply-To: <ce26322e-2f7e-d1c1-f196-d66dcf739af9@joelhalpern.com>
Reply-To: sarikaya@ieee.org
From: Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2020 15:12:10 -0600
Message-ID: <CAC8QAcdrhZftqji3czkEciFgFx7BVNx0WGEuUvuvcUt1X1hv9A@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>, pidloc@ietf.org
Cc: "<Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de>" <Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de>, Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f7d251059d39adf6"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pidloc/OoX0td0frb8PWNsbv383IrGcblg>
Subject: Re: [Pidloc] New Version Notification for draft-iannone-pidloc-privacy-00.txt
Precedence: list

Thanks Joel for your comments. I am cc'ing it to the list.

We will work on it and hopefully come back with our replies/revised draft.

Regards,
Behcet

On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 2:23 PM Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> wrote:

> Reading through the draft, some observations occurred to me.  I hope
> they are helpful to you.
>
> Section 3.2.1 reads very strangely.  it seems to mix the need to secure
> access to IoT entities with the need to maintain privacy of something
> (the ID? the Locator?) of those devices.  When it says "there are very
> strong reasons..." I am left going "there are?" as this seems unmotivated.
>
> (I will admit at this point that I wonder if section 3 is actually
> useful.  It is not describing use ases for I/L separation.  It seems to
> be describing some sets of clients who might use I/L separation systems.
>   On the one hand, that set ought to be everything, in a "desired"
> state.  In another sense, most of the use cases that LISP is used for
> are not there. )
>
> The second sentence of 3.2.2 is not a sentence.  It appears to be a
> subject phrase.  And then I am left confused as to what challenge it is
> that needs to be solved for the use of end-to-end I/L separation in 5G.
> Other than industry desire to do so.
>
> Section 5.1 on Location privacy should probably have two caveats.  It
> should note that this assumes that identifiers are stable rather than
> mutating.  Second, it should probably repeat the note that there are
> other means of correlation which are very important for this use case.
> (Google and Facebook can correlate your location because you log in to
> them, and they get your locator.  No matter what you do with identifiers
> at the network layer.)  We need to be realistic about what we are trying
> to improve.
>
> I think sections 6 and 7 need to recognize the distinction between
> entities who need to be reached by arbitrary peers (servers) and
> entities that choose who they talk to (clients, UE, ...)  It may also
> want to talk about the concommitant need to share ones locator /
> identifier with communication peers.
>
> Yours,
> Joel
>
>
> On 1/28/2020 12:36 PM, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
> > Hi Joel,
> >
> > We published this draft last week, being a recognized expert in the
> > area, I would like to ask  your comments please.
> > It seems like you are not on pidloc mailing list so you may not have
> > received this email below however you may send your comments to the list
> > we will approve your post.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Behcet & Dirk
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > From: <internet-drafts@ietf.org <mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org>>
> > Date: Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 2:34 AM
> > Subject: New Version Notification for draft-iannone-pidloc-privacy-00.txt
> > To: Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net <mailto:ggx@gigix.net>>, Behcet
> > Sarikaya <sarikaya@ieee.org <mailto:sarikaya@ieee.org>>, Erik Nordmark
> > <nordmark@sonic.net <mailto:nordmark@sonic.net>>, Dirk von Hugo
> > <dirk.von-hugo@telekom.de <mailto:dirk.von-hugo@telekom.de>>
> >
> >
> >
> > A new version of I-D, draft-iannone-pidloc-privacy-00.txt
> > has been successfully submitted by Luigi Iannone and posted to the
> > IETF repository.
> >
> > Name:           draft-iannone-pidloc-privacy
> > Revision:       00
> > Title:          Privacy issues in Identifier/Locator Separation Systems
> > Document date:  2020-01-23
> > Group:          Individual Submission
> > Pages:          11
> > URL:
> > https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-iannone-pidloc-privacy-00.txt
> > Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-iannone-pidloc-privacy/
> > Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-iannone-pidloc-privacy-00
> > Htmlized:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-iannone-pidloc-privacy
> >
> >
> > Abstract:
> >     There exist several protocols and proposals that leverage on the
> >     Identifier/Locator split paradigm, having some form of control plane
> >     by which participating nodes can share their current Identifier-to-
> >     Location information with their peers.  This document explores some
> >     of the privacy considerations for such a type of system.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
> submission
> > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org
> > <http://tools.ietf.org>.
> >
> > The IETF Secretariat
> >
>

Re: [Pidloc] New Version Notification for draft-i… Behcet Sarikaya
Re: [Pidloc] New Version Notification for draft-i… Behcet Sarikaya