Re: Opsdir last call review of draft-atarius-dispatch-meid-urn-13

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Roozbeh,

That’s fine.

Tim 

> On 18 Dec 2017, at 23:56, R Atarius <r_atarius@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Hello Tim,
> 
> please see my comments below
> 
> thanks
> Roozbeh
> 
> 
> From: Tim Chown <tim.chown@xxxxxxxxxx>
> To: ops-dir@xxxxxxxx 
> Cc: draft-atarius-dispatch-meid-urn.all@xxxxxxxx; ietf@xxxxxxxx
> Sent: Friday, December 8, 2017 7:46 AM
> Subject: Opsdir last call review of draft-atarius-dispatch-meid-urn-13
> 
> Reviewer: Tim Chown
> Review result: Ready
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I have reviewed this document as part of the Operational directorate’s ongoing
> effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG.  These
> comments were written with the intent of improving the operational aspects of
> the IETF drafts. Comments that are not addressed in last call may be included
> in AD reviews during the IESG review. Document editors and WG chairs should
> treat these comments just like any other last call comments.
> 
> This document describes a Uniform Resource Name (URN) namespace for the Third
> Generation Partnership Project (3GPP2) and a Namespace Specific String (NSS)
> for the Mobile Equipment Identity (MEID).  Devices supporting only 3GPP2  have
> a requirement to be able to use an MEID as a URN.  This document presents the
> MEID, describing its format, and includes recommendations on privacy
> requirements when MEIDs are transmitted, and that MEIDs not be used for
> authorisation purposes or as personal identifiers.
> 
> Review result: Ready with Nits
> 
> This document is well-written and clear to follow.
> 
> Nits:
> 
> The figure on page 7 should perhaps extend the bottom line with an extra --+ to
> clearly indicate that only the first 4 bits of the 8th octet are used for the
> check digit.
> 
> <Roozbeh> OK!
> 
> Section 8: "provider's customer" should be "providers' customer"
> 
> <Roozbeh> OK!
> 
> It is good to see discussion of privacy and security issues here. Perhaps state
> that as a general privacy principle, only the minimal information required
> should be transmitted in any protocol.  RFC7258 could be mentioned; though the
> scope over which MEIDs may be transmitted is not wholly clear.
> 
> <Roozbeh> There is a recommendation for hop-to-hop and end-to-end encryption for carrying MEID URN. The minimal required information is the MEID URN, therefore I would like to keep it as it is,  if that's OK with you.
> 
> 
> Tim
> 
> 
> 
> 





[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]