well-trodden territory. How would your notional text differ from what's
already in l7-lcp-ps and HELD?
--Richard
Rosen, Brian wrote:
> In the HELD Identity draft, one of the uses is a 3rd party OBO request
> for location. An example use case is interim deployment of VoIP
> emergency calls, before the device is upgraded to query a LIS via an LCP
> itself. It will be common to use an IP address in this case.
>
> The draft does not discuss the cautions we have long discussed when
> using an IP address as an identifier. It's quite clear that an IP
> address WILL be used for this case, and denying it is silly.
> Considerations for its use should be provided. I think we want text
> that discusses issues such as the effect of NAT and VPNs, perhaps a
> discussion of needing return routability testing to assure the 3rd party
> that it has a good IP address, etc.
>
> Some of the latter considerations may also apply to other forms of
> identity that may be used with this draft.
>
> Brian
> _______________________________________________
> Geopriv mailing list
> Geopriv@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
>
_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
