Subject: [Mip6] [issue81] Comment by Russ Housley <[email-masked]>

From: admin <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 20:19:15 +0000

New submission from admin <[email-masked]>:

Comment:

  From the SecDir Review by Lakshminath Dondeti:
  >
  > The security considerations section is pretty light.  It says in part 
  > that "solutions to provide location privacy ... must be secure 
  > ...."  Even though this is a problem statement document, perhaps it 
  > is the place to explain the security criteria used in evaluating 
  > candidate solutions.  For instance, the two types of solutions I can 
  > think of are 1) providing confidentiality of addresses by encrypting 
  > them and 2) making use of temporary addresses.  There are 
  > implications to using either type of solution.
  >
  > Perhaps there are other ways to list the criteria too.

----------
category: Editorial
draft: draft-ietf-mip6-location-privacy-ps
messages: 269
nosy: admin
priority: Should fix
status: Pending
title: Comment by Russ Housley <[email-masked]>

_________________________________________________
Mip6 issue tracker <[email-masked]>
<http://www.mip4.org/issues/tracker/mip6/issue81>
_________________________________________________

_______________________________________________
Mip6 mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6