Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Re: [Geopriv] [geopriv] #19: Distinguish identity cases as being LCP-like, not LCP

Alissa,


On 10/10/09 3:40 PM, "Alissa Cooper" <acooper@cdt.org> wrote:


>
> == Section 5 (based on text suggested below) ==
>> The authorization model for a location configuration protocol assumes
>> that the LR is also the Target, and that providing that LR with
>> information
>> about its own location is allowed. We call this property "LCP
>> policy".
>
> Replace with:
>
> Location configuration protocols make use of an authorization model
> known as "LCP policy," which permits only Targets to be the recipients
> of their own locations.
>

GeoPriv should not set-in-stone "LCP Policy". That's up to the RuleMaker.
We can assume the RuleMaker's policy for a target knowing it's own location
is different from a 3rd party policy, and we can posture the request as
such, but as Laura Leiss has stated for a long time, the Rulemaker will
ultimately decide whether a target will see it's own location or not.

-Marc-


_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv