Re: [Geopriv] Geopriv L7 LCP: New Requirement

From: Hannes Tschofenig ^lt;>
Date: Sat Feb 10 2007 - 15:40:29 EST

Hi Henning,

some terminology first:
* Target -- RFC 3693
* Location Information Server (LIS) -- entity that knows the location of
the Target
* OBO-Client -- entity that requests the location of the Target without
being the Target itself.

If I understood the requirement correctly then it is
* applicable only if the OBO-Client is in the same network as the Target
or has a relationship to it,
   This aspect is necessary since (a) the security issues are difficult
to handle and (b) the identifier might not be resolvable outside this
* uses identifiers like the VCI/VPI (and not the URI)


Henning Schulzrinne wrote:
> I don't see the difference of this compared to passing a
> location-retrieving URI to the third party.
> To ensure any kind of security, the target has to provide credentials
> to the third party - which is essentially what the randomized URI
> does. (You'd presumably want these credentials to be time-limited, too.)
> Henning
> On Feb 10, 2007, at 3:14 PM, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> Otmar raised some interesting aspects as part of his review of
>> <draft-ietf-geopriv-l7-lcp-ps-00.txt> that are very relevant for this
>> working group since he raised a new requirement in context of the
>> Geopriv L7 LCP work. He refers to the "on-behalf-of" functionality
>> where a solution for HELD can be found in
>> The basic requirement is quite simple and known to everyone: "A
>> entity (other than the Target) asks on behalf of the Target for the
>> location information information of the Target."
>> I don't recall that we ever discussed this requirement in the design
>> team (because it was not raised) but Otmar thinks it is relevant.
>> Ciao
>> Hannes
>> _______________________________________________
>> Geopriv mailing list

Geopriv mailing list
Received on Sat, 10 Feb 2007 21:40:29 +0100

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Feb 10 2007 - 15:39:57 EST