Re: RE: [Geopriv] Consensus on changes to location-conveyance

Henning Schulzrinne <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.sip,gmane.ietf.geopriv
Message-ID <[email protected]>
I think these are reasonable guidelines unless we're suddenly very  
selective about when privacy applies (or limit l-by-r to emergency  
calling in certain no-consent-required jurisdictions).

Specifying the precise 'limited amount of time' is probably something  
that local regulations need to address.

On Jul 25, 2006, at 8:17 PM, Andrew Newton wrote:

>
> On Jul 25, 2006, at 7:21 PM, Jeroen van Bemmel wrote:
>> For location-by-reference, you'd probably want some additional  
>> requirements:
>> - URL must be valid for a limited amount of time
>> - URL must be cryptographically hard to guess
>> - URL must not contain any information that identifies the user /  
>> device / AoR
>> - for whatever transport protocol is used: response must be marked  
>> as 'no cache'
>> - user must be able to remove the information at the URL, ie  
>> explicit invalidation
>> - user must be able to verify correctness of the issued  
>> information (ie user can access the URL himself)
>> - user must be able to control who accesses the URL, both upfront  
>> and history of accesses (for a reasonable period)
>> - there must be explicit consent before a proxy would insert user  
>> location
>
>
>
> Just thinking out loud here, but maybe the rule should be that  
> proxies never append a Location header except for emergencies.

I think that's desirable unless there's a clear indication by the  
caller to do otherwise, by some consent mechanism. However, by the  
time you implement the consent mechanism, you've probably already  
implemented the better UAC-based mechanism, so it seems hard to argue  
for that complexity. The only technical argument I've heard for proxy  
insertion is legacy equipment, where requiring adding consent flags  
is clearly a non-starter.


_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [email protected] for questions on current sip
Use [email protected] for new developments on the application of sip
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.