Hi Stephen,
Please see inline.
Cheers,
Med
-Message d'origine-
De : Stephen Farrell [mailto:stephen.farr...@cs.tcd.ie]
Envoyé : vendredi 6 juin 2014 17:59
À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN; Ted Lemon
Cc : Brian E Carpenter; ietf-privacy@ietf.org; int-a...@ietf.org
Objet : Re: [Int-area]
On 6/7/2014 6:20 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
Yes, source addresses leak information that affects privacy. But
we do not have a practical way to mitigate that. So therefore
BCP188 does not call for doing stupid stuff, nor for new laws of
physics (unlike -04 of the draft we're discussing;-)
Dear all,
I would like to confirm this: As already pointed out by Bruno in
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/int-area/current/msg03904.html there is
the emergency call use case at ETSI and beside that there are application
proposals within WGs SFC, TCPM, etc. beside other drafts which refer
Re-,
Please see inline.
Cheers,
Med
-Message d'origine-
De : ietf-privacy [mailto:ietf-privacy-boun...@ietf.org] De la part de
Stephen Farrell
Envoyé : samedi 7 juin 2014 15:21
À : Dan Wing
Cc : ietf-privacy@ietf.org; Internet Area; Joe Touch
Objet : Re: [ietf-privacy] [Int-area] NAT
On 11/06/14 15:54, Joe Touch wrote:
On 6/7/2014 6:20 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
Yes, source addresses leak information that affects privacy. But
we do not have a practical way to mitigate that. So therefore
BCP188 does not call for doing stupid stuff, nor for new laws of
physics (unlike
Hiya,
On 11/06/14 15:38, mohamed.boucad...@orange.com wrote:
Re-,
Please see inline.
Cheers, Med
-Message d'origine- De : ietf-privacy
[mailto:ietf-privacy-boun...@ietf.org] De la part de Stephen
Farrell Envoyé : samedi 7 juin 2014 15:21 À : Dan Wing Cc :
On 6/11/2014 8:09 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
On 11/06/14 15:54, Joe Touch wrote:
On 6/7/2014 6:20 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
Yes, source addresses leak information that affects privacy. But
we do not have a practical way to mitigate that. So therefore
BCP188 does not call for doing
I agree entirely that defining host identification as a problem
indicates that the authors believe a solution is called for. I also
agree that the privacy impact of solution candidates must be discussed,
including making a concerted effort to mitigate the possibility of those
solution
