> > wrt the above "when":
> >
> > s/when/after
> >
> > IMO this makes the statement more direct and to the point.
>
>Yes, it's more clear.
>
> > >When implementing a DHCP server that will serve
> > >clients across an uncontrolled network, one
> > >should consider the potential security risks."
> >
> > I assume that for controlled networks -- this doesn't apply?
>
>I suppose that depends on what "uncontrolled" means. My (perhaps
>incorrect) assumption was that "uncontrolled" meant a network that
>did not employ security mechanisms such as link layer security or
>even packet filtering. Perhaps another term might be appropriate?
I was thinking more along the lines of SMB/enterprise vs. SP
environments, where one is generally (significantly) more often
controlled than the other (but not in every case).
>The security risks discussed in the section include disclosure and
>packet modification.
>
>The section advocates use of DHCP authentication to address packet
>modification threats.
>
>In -06, I inserted a sentence to address the disclosure aspect:
>"Link layer confidentiality may also be employed to reduce the risk
>of location disclosure."
>
>Which begs the question of what additional potential security risks
>the sentence is advocating that we consider.
this might be opening up pandora's box here, so let's keep this
between just you and me...
;-)
is the 'link layer confidentiality' you're thinking of L2 hop-by-hop,
or between the endhost and the first L3 node? One or two multipart
sentence(s) could address both cases, if you want to expound on this point.
_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
