From falk@bbn.com Fri May 1 12:08:23 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mobopts@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mobopts@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD6F73A691D for ; Fri, 1 May 2009 12:08:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.004 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.004 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.204, BAYES_00=-2.599, SARE_SUB_RAND_LETTRS4=0.799] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uXzfvAZZNHin for ; Fri, 1 May 2009 12:08:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx3.bbn.com (mx3.bbn.com [128.33.1.81]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F7CC3A694A for ; Fri, 1 May 2009 12:08:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dhcp89-081-146.bbn.com ([128.89.81.146]) by mx3.bbn.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Lzy79-00046S-Ag; Fri, 01 May 2009 15:09:39 -0400 Message-ID: <49FB48F3.9030904@bbn.com> Date: Fri, 01 May 2009 15:09:39 -0400 From: Aaron Falk Organization: BBN Technologies User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Macintosh/20090302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rajeev Koodli References: <542673.49960.qm@web111411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <542673.49960.qm@web111411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: irsg@ISI.EDU, mobopts@irtf.org, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Subject: Re: [Mobopts] [IRSG] Request to progress I-D draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions to RFC editor X-BeenThere: mobopts@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobility Optimizations List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 May 2009 19:08:23 -0000 Hi Rajeev- I didn't see any responses. If your decision was that no changes were needed, I'm not challenging it. (Although, it is the shepherd's responsibility to ensure the reviewers are aware of that decision.) I just want to avoid substantive changes once the doc goes to RFC Ed. --aaron Rajeev Koodli wrote: > > Hi Aaron, > > we also responded to the comments. I didn't think that a revision was > necessary. I will go back and have another look. > > Thanks, > > -Rajeev > > > > --- On *Thu, 4/30/09, Aaron Falk //* wrote: > > > From: Aaron Falk > Subject: Re: [IRSG] Request to progress I-D > draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions to RFC editor > To: "Rajeev Koodli" > Cc: irsg@ISI.EDU, mobopts@irtf.org, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com > Date: Thursday, April 30, 2009, 5:55 AM > > Hi Rajeev, Basavaraj- > > The poll was conducted on rev 12 of the doc. I saw substantive > comments > (i.e., beyond typos) from Wes Eddy and Stephen Farrell. The current > version in the ID repository is still 12. So, my assumption is no > changes to the draft have been made in response to the comments. > So, am > I confused? Did the comments result in no changes? > > --aaron > > Rajeev Koodli wrote: > > Hi Aaron, > > > > author's perspective: We did respond to all the comments and > there was > > subsequent response which indicated that the ID is ready for > > publication. > > > > A couple of typos were caught which can be fixed in RFC editor's > review. > > > > Thanks, > > > > -Rajeev > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 6:33 AM, Aaron Falk > wrote: > > > >> Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com > wrote: > >> > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> The IRSG poll for I-D: > draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions has > >>> been completed. Other than a few nits which can be addressed > as part of the > >>> RFC-editor process, there were no objections to publishing the > document. > >>> > >>> The conclusion is that the I-D is ready for publication. > >>> > >>> In my role as the shepherd for this I-D, I recommend > progressing this I-D to > >>> the RFC editor for publication. > >>> > >>> -Basavaraj > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> Hi Basavaraj- > >> > >> It doesn't look like the draft has been revised to respond to the > >> comments from the IRSG review. Wes Eddy and Stephen Farrell sent > >> substantive but non-blocking comments. Please respond to those > that > >> before requesting publication. (The RFC Editor's 'Authors 48 Hours > >> review' isn't intended to do another editing pass but to fix > editorial > >> issues that come up during RFC preparation.) > >> > >> When that's done, I'd like to ask that you prepare a 'request to > >> publish' message that has a little more about the review > history of the > >> document. I'm attaching a message from another doc so you can see > >> what's expected. > >> > >> Let me know if you have questions. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> --aaron > >> > >> > >>> Aaron: This is a request to publish the ICCRG's document > >>> draft-irtf-iccrg-cc-rfcs-06 as an Informational RFC. > >>> > >>> The draft has been revised based on a number of reviews, > >>> and the latest version incorporates editorial marks that > >>> were submitted by Stephen Farrell and Juergen Shoenwaelder > >>> during IRSG Review / Poll, where 2 "Ready to Publish" votes > >>> were received, and none otherwise. Prior to this, the > >>> document has been reviewed and modified based on other IRSG > >>> member reviews (Sally Floyd and Mark Allman) during the > >>> ICCRG process. > >>> > >>> During the ICCRG's development of the document, specific > >>> public reviews that changes were incorporated from were > >>> submitted on the ICCRG list by: > >>> > >>> - Rex Buddenberg > >>> - Mitchell Erblichs > >>> - Lachlan Andrew > >>> - Sally Floyd > >>> - Gorry Fairhurst > >>> - Lars Eggert > >>> - Mark Allman > >>> > >>> The issue tracker entry includes the versions of the > >>> draft since IRSG review started, and the reviews from > >>> Juergen and Stephen: > >>> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/irtf/trac/ticket/25 > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Mobopts mailing list > >> Mobopts@irtf.org > >> http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/mobopts > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ > IRSG mailing list > IRSG@mailman.isi.edu > http://mailman..isi.edu/mailman/listinfo/irsg > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Mobopts mailing list > Mobopts@irtf.org > http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/mobopts > From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Fri May 1 12:25:51 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mobopts@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mobopts@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4C4E3A6BF4 for ; Fri, 1 May 2009 12:25:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.021 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.021 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.221, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_SUB_RAND_LETTRS4=0.799] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Y6-3OeFiKCA7 for ; Fri, 1 May 2009 12:25:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-mx09.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [192.100.105.134]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D6B33A6BEE for ; Fri, 1 May 2009 12:25:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from esebh105.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh105.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.211]) by mgw-mx09.nokia.com (Switch-3.2.6/Switch-3.2.6) with ESMTP id n41JR7QW022911; Fri, 1 May 2009 14:27:08 -0500 Received: from esebh102.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.138.183]) by esebh105.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 1 May 2009 22:27:03 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.6]) by esebh102.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 1 May 2009 22:27:03 +0300 Received: from NOK-AM1MHUB-05.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.9) by NOK-am1MHUB-02.mgdnok.nokia.com (65.54.30.6) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.340.0; Fri, 1 May 2009 21:27:02 +0200 Received: from NOK-EUMSG-03.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.108]) by NOK-AM1MHUB-05.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.9]) with mapi; Fri, 1 May 2009 21:26:50 +0200 From: To: , Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 21:26:57 +0200 Thread-Topic: [Mobopts] [IRSG] Request to progress I-D draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions to RFC editor Thread-Index: AcnKkGbyD83dlj5pQ/eNeW/u+TmcEgAAmOoK Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <49FB48F3.9030904@bbn.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 May 2009 19:27:03.0326 (UTC) FILETIME=[CE60DBE0:01C9CA92] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Cc: irsg@ISI.EDU, mobopts@irtf.org Subject: Re: [Mobopts] [IRSG] Request to progress I-D draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions to RFC editor X-BeenThere: mobopts@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobility Optimizations List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 May 2009 19:25:51 -0000 Hi Aaron, I do not believe that changes are needed at this time to the I-D. The nits that were identified can be addressed duing the rfc ed process. -Basavaraj On 5/1/09 2:09 PM, "ext Aaron Falk" wrote: > Hi Rajeev- >=20 > I didn't see any responses. If your decision was that no changes were > needed, I'm not challenging it. (Although, it is the shepherd's > responsibility to ensure the reviewers are aware of that decision.) I > just want to avoid substantive changes once the doc goes to RFC Ed. >=20 > --aaron >=20 > Rajeev Koodli wrote: >>=20 >> Hi Aaron, >>=20 >> we also responded to the comments. I didn't think that a revision was >> necessary. I will go back and have another look. >>=20 >> Thanks, >>=20 >> -Rajeev >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> --- On *Thu, 4/30/09, Aaron Falk //* wrote: >>=20 >>=20 >> From: Aaron Falk >> Subject: Re: [IRSG] Request to progress I-D >> draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions to RFC editor >> To: "Rajeev Koodli" >> Cc: irsg@ISI.EDU, mobopts@irtf.org, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com >> Date: Thursday, April 30, 2009, 5:55 AM >>=20 >> Hi Rajeev, Basavaraj- >>=20 >> The poll was conducted on rev 12 of the doc. I saw substantive >> comments >> (i.e., beyond typos) from Wes Eddy and Stephen Farrell. The current >> version in the ID repository is still 12. So, my assumption is no >> changes to the draft have been made in response to the comments. >> So, am >> I confused? Did the comments result in no changes? >>=20 >> --aaron >>=20 >> Rajeev Koodli wrote: >>> Hi Aaron, >>>=20 >>> author's perspective: We did respond to all the comments and >> there was >>> subsequent response which indicated that the ID is ready for >>> publication. >>>=20 >>> A couple of typos were caught which can be fixed in RFC editor's >> review. >>>=20 >>> Thanks, >>>=20 >>> -Rajeev >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 6:33 AM, Aaron Falk > > wrote: >>> =20 >>>> Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com >> wrote: >>>> =20 >>>>> Hello, >>>>>=20 >>>>> The IRSG poll for I-D: >> draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions has >>>>> been completed. Other than a few nits which can be addressed >> as part of the >>>>> RFC-editor process, there were no objections to publishing the >> document. >>>>>=20 >>>>> The conclusion is that the I-D is ready for publication. >>>>>=20 >>>>> In my role as the shepherd for this I-D, I recommend >> progressing this I-D to >>>>> the RFC editor for publication. >>>>>=20 >>>>> -Basavaraj >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> =20 >>>> Hi Basavaraj- >>>>=20 >>>> It doesn't look like the draft has been revised to respond to the >>>> comments from the IRSG review. Wes Eddy and Stephen Farrell sent >>>> substantive but non-blocking comments. Please respond to those >> that >>>> before requesting publication. (The RFC Editor's 'Authors 48 Hours >>>> review' isn't intended to do another editing pass but to fix >> editorial >>>> issues that come up during RFC preparation.) >>>>=20 >>>> When that's done, I'd like to ask that you prepare a 'request to >>>> publish' message that has a little more about the review >> history of the >>>> document. I'm attaching a message from another doc so you can see >>>> what's expected. >>>>=20 >>>> Let me know if you have questions. >>>>=20 >>>> Thanks, >>>>=20 >>>> --aaron >>>>=20 >>>> =20 >>>>> Aaron: This is a request to publish the ICCRG's document >>>>> draft-irtf-iccrg-cc-rfcs-06 as an Informational RFC. >>>>>=20 >>>>> The draft has been revised based on a number of reviews, >>>>> and the latest version incorporates editorial marks that >>>>> were submitted by Stephen Farrell and Juergen Shoenwaelder >>>>> during IRSG Review / Poll, where 2 "Ready to Publish" votes >>>>> were received, and none otherwise. Prior to this, the >>>>> document has been reviewed and modified based on other IRSG >>>>> member reviews (Sally Floyd and Mark Allman) during the >>>>> ICCRG process. >>>>>=20 >>>>> During the ICCRG's development of the document, specific >>>>> public reviews that changes were incorporated from were >>>>> submitted on the ICCRG list by: >>>>>=20 >>>>> - Rex Buddenberg >>>>> - Mitchell Erblichs >>>>> - Lachlan Andrew >>>>> - Sally Floyd >>>>> - Gorry Fairhurst >>>>> - Lars Eggert >>>>> - Mark Allman >>>>>=20 >>>>> The issue tracker entry includes the versions of the >>>>> draft since IRSG review started, and the reviews from >>>>> Juergen and Stephen: >>>>> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/irtf/trac/ticket/25 >>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> =20 >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Mobopts mailing list >>>> Mobopts@irtf.org >>>> http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/mobopts >>>>=20 >>>> =20 >> _______________________________________________ >> IRSG mailing list >> IRSG@mailman.isi.edu >> http://mailman..isi.edu/mailman/listinfo/irsg >> >>=20 >>=20 >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> Mobopts mailing list >> Mobopts@irtf.org >> http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/mobopts >> =20 From falk@bbn.com Fri May 1 13:49:53 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mobopts@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mobopts@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF08E3A693C for ; Fri, 1 May 2009 13:49:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.998 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.198, BAYES_00=-2.599, SARE_SUB_RAND_LETTRS4=0.799] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M4Q4-klXVqFl for ; Fri, 1 May 2009 13:49:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx11.bbn.com (mx11.bbn.com [128.33.0.80]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 377B528C229 for ; Fri, 1 May 2009 13:47:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dhcp89-081-146.bbn.com ([128.89.81.146]) by mx11.bbn.com with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LzzfI-0008Pt-G5; Fri, 01 May 2009 16:49:01 -0400 Message-ID: <49FB603C.1030705@bbn.com> Date: Fri, 01 May 2009 16:49:00 -0400 From: Aaron Falk Organization: BBN Technologies User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Macintosh/20090302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: rajeev_koodli@yahoo.com, irsg@ISI.EDU, mobopts@irtf.org Subject: Re: [Mobopts] [IRSG] Request to progress I-D draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions to RFC editor X-BeenThere: mobopts@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobility Optimizations List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 May 2009 20:49:53 -0000 Sounds good. If you could write up a 'request to publish' message like the template below, I think we're good to go. --aaron Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com wrote: > Hi Aaron, > > I do not believe that changes are needed at this time to the I-D. > The nits that were identified can be addressed duing the rfc ed process. > > -Basavaraj > > > On 5/1/09 2:09 PM, "ext Aaron Falk" wrote: > > >> Hi Rajeev- >> >> I didn't see any responses. If your decision was that no changes were >> needed, I'm not challenging it. (Although, it is the shepherd's >> responsibility to ensure the reviewers are aware of that decision.) I >> just want to avoid substantive changes once the doc goes to RFC Ed. >> >> --aaron >> >> Rajeev Koodli wrote: >> >>> Hi Aaron, >>> >>> we also responded to the comments. I didn't think that a revision was >>> necessary. I will go back and have another look. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> -Rajeev >>> >>> >>> >>> --- On *Thu, 4/30/09, Aaron Falk //* wrote: >>> >>> >>> From: Aaron Falk >>> Subject: Re: [IRSG] Request to progress I-D >>> draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions to RFC editor >>> To: "Rajeev Koodli" >>> Cc: irsg@ISI.EDU, mobopts@irtf.org, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com >>> Date: Thursday, April 30, 2009, 5:55 AM >>> >>> Hi Rajeev, Basavaraj- >>> >>> The poll was conducted on rev 12 of the doc. I saw substantive >>> comments >>> (i.e., beyond typos) from Wes Eddy and Stephen Farrell. The current >>> version in the ID repository is still 12. So, my assumption is no >>> changes to the draft have been made in response to the comments. >>> So, am >>> I confused? Did the comments result in no changes? >>> >>> --aaron >>> >>> Rajeev Koodli wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Aaron, >>>> >>>> author's perspective: We did respond to all the comments and >>>> >>> there was >>> >>>> subsequent response which indicated that the ID is ready for >>>> publication. >>>> >>>> A couple of typos were caught which can be fixed in RFC editor's >>>> >>> review. >>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> -Rajeev >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 6:33 AM, Aaron Falk >>> >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com >>>>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Hello, >>>>>> >>>>>> The IRSG poll for I-D: >>>>>> >>> draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions has >>> >>>>>> been completed. Other than a few nits which can be addressed >>>>>> >>> as part of the >>> >>>>>> RFC-editor process, there were no objections to publishing the >>>>>> >>> document. >>> >>>>>> The conclusion is that the I-D is ready for publication. >>>>>> >>>>>> In my role as the shepherd for this I-D, I recommend >>>>>> >>> progressing this I-D to >>> >>>>>> the RFC editor for publication. >>>>>> >>>>>> -Basavaraj >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> Hi Basavaraj- >>>>> >>>>> It doesn't look like the draft has been revised to respond to the >>>>> comments from the IRSG review. Wes Eddy and Stephen Farrell sent >>>>> substantive but non-blocking comments. Please respond to those >>>>> >>> that >>> >>>>> before requesting publication. (The RFC Editor's 'Authors 48 Hours >>>>> review' isn't intended to do another editing pass but to fix >>>>> >>> editorial >>> >>>>> issues that come up during RFC preparation.) >>>>> >>>>> When that's done, I'd like to ask that you prepare a 'request to >>>>> publish' message that has a little more about the review >>>>> >>> history of the >>> >>>>> document. I'm attaching a message from another doc so you can see >>>>> what's expected. >>>>> >>>>> Let me know if you have questions. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> --aaron >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Aaron: This is a request to publish the ICCRG's document >>>>>> draft-irtf-iccrg-cc-rfcs-06 as an Informational RFC. >>>>>> >>>>>> The draft has been revised based on a number of reviews, >>>>>> and the latest version incorporates editorial marks that >>>>>> were submitted by Stephen Farrell and Juergen Shoenwaelder >>>>>> during IRSG Review / Poll, where 2 "Ready to Publish" votes >>>>>> were received, and none otherwise. Prior to this, the >>>>>> document has been reviewed and modified based on other IRSG >>>>>> member reviews (Sally Floyd and Mark Allman) during the >>>>>> ICCRG process. >>>>>> >>>>>> During the ICCRG's development of the document, specific >>>>>> public reviews that changes were incorporated from were >>>>>> submitted on the ICCRG list by: >>>>>> >>>>>> - Rex Buddenberg >>>>>> - Mitchell Erblichs >>>>>> - Lachlan Andrew >>>>>> - Sally Floyd >>>>>> - Gorry Fairhurst >>>>>> - Lars Eggert >>>>>> - Mark Allman >>>>>> >>>>>> The issue tracker entry includes the versions of the >>>>>> draft since IRSG review started, and the reviews from >>>>>> Juergen and Stephen: >>>>>> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/irtf/trac/ticket/25 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Mobopts mailing list >>>>> Mobopts@irtf.org >>>>> http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/mobopts >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> IRSG mailing list >>> IRSG@mailman.isi.edu >>> http://mailman..isi.edu/mailman/listinfo/irsg >>> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Mobopts mailing list >>> Mobopts@irtf.org >>> http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/mobopts >>> >>> > > From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Fri May 15 14:08:53 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mobopts@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mobopts@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FA203A6E5D for ; Fri, 15 May 2009 14:08:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.87 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.87 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.370, BAYES_00=-2.599, MANGLED_LIST=2.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_SUB_RAND_LETTRS4=0.799] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eQpqNlJQQuw2 for ; Fri, 15 May 2009 14:08:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-mx09.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [192.100.105.134]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA1EA3A6924 for ; Fri, 15 May 2009 14:08:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from esebh105.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh105.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.211]) by mgw-mx09.nokia.com (Switch-3.2.6/Switch-3.2.6) with ESMTP id n4FLA2XA006036; Fri, 15 May 2009 16:10:10 -0500 Received: from esebh102.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.138.183]) by esebh105.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sat, 16 May 2009 00:09:58 +0300 Received: from vaebh101.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.160.244.22]) by esebh102.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sat, 16 May 2009 00:09:58 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.5]) by vaebh101.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sat, 16 May 2009 00:09:53 +0300 Received: from NOK-EUMSG-03.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.108]) by nok-am1mhub-01.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.5]) with mapi; Fri, 15 May 2009 23:09:53 +0200 From: To: , Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 23:10:02 +0200 Thread-Topic: [Mobopts] [IRSG] IRSG PollforI-D:draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions Thread-Index: Acmnhoi0QItsMES6TYGcLIgE+QgMuAuGvo/1 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3d57679a0903172200m394665e7q8629a3df31c6a18a@mail.gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 May 2009 21:09:53.0328 (UTC) FILETIME=[7DC4F300:01C9D5A1] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Cc: irsg@isi.edu, mobopts@irtf.org, wesley.m.eddy@nasa.gov, stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie Subject: Re: [Mobopts] [IRSG] IRSG PollforI-D:draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions X-BeenThere: mobopts@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobility Optimizations List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 21:08:53 -0000 The outcome of the IRSG poll has been positive and I have received at least 3 "Ready to publish" recommendations. A few nits have been identified. While it is possible to handle these as part of the RFC editor process, I think it would be best to spin a new revision of the ID which takes care of these nits now. It would also avoid the problem of these issues falling through the cracks as the document progresses thru the pipeline. -Basavaraj On 3/17/09 11:00 PM, "ext Rajeev Koodli" wrote: > Hi Stephen, >=20 > I agree with Qiu Ying's reply. >=20 > We can address the nits as part of RFC Editor revisions. >=20 > So, I request that the ID be progressed forward. >=20 > Thanks for your review. >=20 > Regards, >=20 > -Rajeev >=20 >=20 > On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 3:37 AM, QIU Ying wro= te: >> Hi, Stephen >>=20 >> Thanks for your review and support. >>=20 >> For the #1 comment regarding to active attacks: we discussed this issue >> before, but it is too difficult to enumerate all of active attacks. In f= act, >> if an attacker launches an active attack signaling, =A0the mobile node h= as 2 >> choices: 1) simply drop the signaling message according to its own acces= s >> policy, hence it is not much for further discussion. 2) accept the signa= ling >> messages, then the MN must response the signaling. Hence the attacker is >> treated as a correspondent node and the correspondent node is still not = able >> to map the real home address and the in-use care-of-address according to= our >> solution. >>=20 >> For the #2 comment regarding to using ECB in DES: since KM is derived fr= om >> Kbm: Kpm =3D HMAC_SHA1(Kbm, 0), and Kbm is always changed by every RR pr= ocess, >> a Kpm can not be re-used during the communication. By the way, the examp= le >> you describe here, I prefer to call it as passive attack because it does= not >> tempt messages from MN or HA directly. >>=20 >> Please correct me if I am wrong. >>=20 >> Regards and Thanks >> Qiu Ying >>=20 >>=20 >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen Farrell" >> >> To: "Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-RCN0)[Verizon]" >> Cc: ; ; >> Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 12:12 AM >> Subject: Re: [Mobopts] [IRSG] IRSG >> PollforI-D:draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions >>=20 >>=20 >>>=20 >>> Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-RCN0)[Verizon] wrote: >>>>=20 >>>> You can record a vote for "ready to publish" from me. >>>=20 >>> Same here. >>>=20 >>> My non-blocking comments are below. Feel free to take 'em >>> on board or not, as you see fit. >>>=20 >>> Stephen. >>>=20 >>> #1 Its a bit surprising that active attackers aren't considered. >>> Maybe adding a justification for that would be good? I guess the >>> danger is that someone goes and implements all of this and claims >>> to have produced a "secure" solution, but in fact has only produced >>> something good against passive attacks. >>>=20 >>> #2 section 5.1, what mode of operation is used for the generation >>> of the encrypted home address? For AES I think ECB is ok, but if >>> a block cipher with a smaller block (e.g. =A03DES) is used, then you >>> should probably not use ECB as that'd expose some information if >>> Kpm is re-used and if the home address structure is sensitive. >>> I've no idea if that's significant or not, but specifying CBC mode >>> for shorter-block ciphers would I think remove the potential >>> vulnerability. (3DES with ECB mode might also allow some non-obvious >>> cut'n'paste attacks if Kpm is re-used, though those'd be active >>> attacks and so presumably out of scope.) >>>=20 >>> Nits: >>>=20 >>> #1 1st sentence of section 1 is missing a word, maybe "problem" >>>=20 >>> #2, p12: s/If such/If so/ >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Mobopts mailing list >>> Mobopts@irtf.org >>> http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/mobopts >>=20 >> Institute for Infocomm Research disclaimer: =A0"This email is confidenti= al and >> may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete = it >> and notify us immediately. Please do not copy or use it for any purpose,= or >> disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you." >> _______________________________________________ >> Mobopts mailing list >> Mobopts@irtf.org >> http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/mobopts >>=20 From rkoodli@starentnetworks.com Tue May 19 09:35:36 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mobopts@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mobopts@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA2A33A68B6 for ; Tue, 19 May 2009 09:35:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.184 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.184 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.384, BAYES_00=-2.599, SARE_SUB_RAND_LETTRS4=0.799] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yncRMVnq6IUj for ; Tue, 19 May 2009 09:35:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0.starentnetworks.com (mx0.starentnetworks.com [12.38.223.203]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02BD03A68B0 for ; Tue, 19 May 2009 09:35:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mx0.starentnetworks.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAC969004B for ; Tue, 19 May 2009 12:37:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mx0.starentnetworks.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx0.starentnetworks.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 01738-10 for ; Tue, 19 May 2009 12:37:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exchtewks1.starentnetworks.com (exchtewks1.starentnetworks.com [10.2.4.28]) by mx0.starentnetworks.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Tue, 19 May 2009 12:37:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from exchtewks3.starentnetworks.com ([10.2.4.31]) by exchtewks1.starentnetworks.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 19 May 2009 12:37:08 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 12:35:23 -0400 Message-ID: <4D35478224365146822AE9E3AD4A2666035AABAA@exchtewks3.starentnetworks.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: New Version Notification for draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions-13 Thread-Index: AcnYkBlp1eMymbMIQI2gUx/G5zsGewAD7VWw References: <20090519144105.AB3EF3A6D11@core3.amsl.com> From: "Koodli, Rajeev" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 May 2009 16:37:08.0630 (UTC) FILETIME=[0D4D3360:01C9D8A0] X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new 2.2.1 (20041222) at mx0.starentnetworks.com Subject: [Mobopts] FW: New Version Notification for draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions-13 X-BeenThere: mobopts@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobility Optimizations List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 16:35:36 -0000 =20 Raj, =20 here is the revised version 13 incoporating the comments from IRSG poll. =20 Regards, =20 -Rajeev =20 ________________________________ From: IETF I-D Submission Tool [mailto:idsubmission@ietf.org] Sent: Tue 5/19/2009 7:41 AM To: Koodli, Rajeev Cc: qiuying@i2r.a-star.edu.sg; fanzhao@marvell.com Subject: New Version Notification for = draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions-13=20 A new version of I-D, = draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions-13.txt has been = successfuly submitted by Rajeev Koodli and posted to the IETF = repository. Filename: draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions Revision: 13 Title: Mobile IPv6 Location Privacy Solutions Creation_date: 2009-05-18 WG ID: Independent Submission Number_of_pages: 50 Abstract: Mobile IPv6 (RFC 3775) enables a mobile node to remain reachable while it roams on the Internet. However, the location and movement of the mobile node can be revealed by the IP addresses used in signaling or data packets. In this document, we consider the Mobile IPv6 location privacy problem described in RFC 4882, and propose efficient and secure techniques to protect location privacy of the mobile node. This document is a product of the IP Mobility Optimizations (MobOpts) Research Group. = =20 The IETF Secretariat. From Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Wed May 27 10:28:35 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mobopts@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mobopts@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A89B3A698B for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 10:28:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.834 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.834 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.333, BAYES_00=-2.599, MANGLED_SOLTNS=2.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_SUB_RAND_LETTRS4=0.799] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6SnQJwheNxAl for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 10:28:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mgw-mx09.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [192.100.105.134]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3A5B3A685A for ; Wed, 27 May 2009 10:28:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vaebh105.NOE.Nokia.com (vaebh105.europe.nokia.com [10.160.244.31]) by mgw-mx09.nokia.com (Switch-3.2.6/Switch-3.2.6) with ESMTP id n4RHRdBP013559; Wed, 27 May 2009 12:28:04 -0500 Received: from vaebh102.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.160.244.23]) by vaebh105.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 27 May 2009 20:27:55 +0300 Received: from vaebh101.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.160.244.22]) by vaebh102.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 27 May 2009 20:27:50 +0300 Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.6]) by vaebh101.NOE.Nokia.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 27 May 2009 20:27:45 +0300 Received: from NOK-EUMSG-03.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.88]) by nok-am1mhub-02.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.6]) with mapi; Wed, 27 May 2009 19:27:45 +0200 From: To: , Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 19:27:54 +0200 Thread-Topic: Request to publish IRTF I-D draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions-13.txt Thread-Index: Acne8HfJQlrJs9he50Gwbq7eCurcUw== Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 May 2009 17:27:45.0495 (UTC) FILETIME=[72B80670:01C9DEF0] X-Nokia-AV: Clean Cc: mobopts@irtf.org Subject: [Mobopts] Request to publish IRTF I-D draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions-13.txt X-BeenThere: mobopts@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobility Optimizations List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 17:28:35 -0000 Hello Aaron, This is a request to publish the Mobopts RG document draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions-13 as an Experimental RFC.=20 The draft has undergone several revisions based on earlier reviews. The latest version of the draft (rev 13) includes the changes and edits that were suggested as part of the the IRSG Review/Poll process. The IRSG Review/Poll was done on Rev 12 of the I-D. There were 3 votes for "Ready to publish" and none opposing the publication.=20 During the development of this document in the mobopts RG, several people have reviewed it and the changes have been incoroporated. The issue tracker entry includes the versions of the draft since the IRSG review started: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/irtf/draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-s= o lutions/=20 -Basavaraj From falk@bbn.com Wed May 27 13:45:37 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: mobopts@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mobopts@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9B093A69CD; Wed, 27 May 2009 13:45:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.009 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.009 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.209, BAYES_00=-2.599, SARE_SUB_RAND_LETTRS4=0.799] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0x2NXnET9-n4; Wed, 27 May 2009 13:45:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx11.bbn.com (mx11.bbn.com [128.33.0.80]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9A673A712E; Wed, 27 May 2009 13:45:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [128.89.254.123] (helo=nut.local) by mx11.bbn.com with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1M9Q1t-0002yL-Dt; Wed, 27 May 2009 16:47:18 -0400 Message-ID: <4A1DA6D4.9000106@bbn.com> Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 16:47:16 -0400 From: Aaron Falk Organization: BBN Technologies User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Macintosh/20090302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: The IESG Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Internet Research Steering Group , mobopts@irtf.org, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com Subject: [Mobopts] Request for IESG review of IRTF doc draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions-13.txt X-BeenThere: mobopts@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobility Optimizations List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 20:45:37 -0000 This is a request for the IESG to perform a RFC3932bis review of draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions-13.txt [1] to be published an an Informational IRTF RFC. The document has been approved for publication by the IRSG. See below for details on prior reviews. Please copy all correspondence to the document shepherd, Basavaraj Patil . --aaron [1] http://trac.tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions-13.txt --- Aaron Falk Chair Internet Research Task Force http://www.irtf.org -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Request to publish IRTF I-D draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions-13.txt Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 19:27:54 +0200 From: To: , CC: Hello Aaron, This is a request to publish the Mobopts RG document draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions-13 as an Experimental RFC. The draft has undergone several revisions based on earlier reviews. The latest version of the draft (rev 13) includes the changes and edits that were suggested as part of the the IRSG Review/Poll process. The IRSG Review/Poll was done on Rev 12 of the I-D. There were 3 votes for "Ready to publish" and none opposing the publication. During the development of this document in the mobopts RG, several people have reviewed it and the changes have been incoroporated. The issue tracker entry includes the versions of the draft since the IRSG review started: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/irtf/draft-irtf-mobopts-location-privacy-solutions/ -Basavaraj