Re: [Geopriv] Re: teasing apart: http as a GEOPRIV using protocol

> In past common policy discussions we also differentiated between limited 
> use addresses and trait-based authorization. A token would match the 
> latter.

I'm not so sure. I see this as another level of indirection:

secret -> access

and

secret -> identity ("alice") -> access

and

secret -> trait ("contractor") -> access


> 
> I guess there are some further differences with regard to the lifetime 
> of the different identifiers, the ability to revoke rights, the number 
> of entities that one can hide behind these identifiers and the storage 
> implications.

Right - the more layers of indirections, the more means to revoke. 
However, I don't see a fundamental difference between the three 
mechanisms in this case. In each case, you can revoke access.



> Isn't this confusing?

Unless you spent three years in Advanced GEOPRIV Language & Philosophy 
class, yes.


>>
>> The L7 discussion was about 'first person' and 'location only' 
>> (although the latter is subject to debate, depending on whether one 
>> considers an IP address of identifying an individual or not).
> 
> That was before we added the Location-by-Reference and subscription-URI 
> concept ....

As long as the recipient of the reference and the URI is the target, it 
doesn't much matter. We get into trouble if we use the same mechanism 
for first-person and third-person retrieval.

Henning

_______________________________________________
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