Re: [VIPR] VIPR privacy issue

["Richard L. Barnes" <[e-mail]>]

<hat type="geopriv"/>

Could we please distinguish between "location privacy" and "IP address privacy"?  They are related, but distinct concepts.



On Jan 26, 2012, at 7:28 PM, Cullen Jennings wrote:

> 
> On Jan 26, 2012, at 11:53 AM, Marc Petit-Huguenin wrote:
> 
>> Cullen's email in
>> P2PSIP was unambiguous in saying that doing this will push VIPR to 2015/2020.
> 
> That is not at all what I said. The 2020 was a date where I think we might be possible to have a location privacy solution. As folks may recall from the BOFs when P2PSIP was formed, Cisco had expressed that one of these cases it was interested in was when the communications were not at all anonymous but the location needed to be. The example used as Vice President of the US during an emergency may be moved to a location that is kept very secret but they need to communicate security and with authentication to a large number of people. Todays internet protocols don't offer much in the form of location privacy - with the possible exception of TOR. Some person with General in their title even showed up at Vancouver and Prague IETFs. When P2PSIP got chartered, location privacy got drooped out because it was viewed as it would just be too much to solve. I think I argued for doing location privacy at the time but I was wrong - it clearly would have been too much to do in the first version. 
> 
> However, I still hope that we might have a standards based location privacy system by 2020 but others think it is better to do this type of thing just a a proprietary system so who knows. 
> 
> 
>