ietf-openproxy
[Top] [All Lists]

FW: Issues raised in opes-enforcement and opes-threat conference call

2002-08-12 05:22:32



 -----Original Message-----
From:         Chan Tat (NRC/Boston)  
Sent: August 09, 2002 02:22 PM
To:   'opes-threat(_at_)dnrc(_dot_)bell-labs(_dot_)com'; 
'opes-enforcement(_at_)dnrc(_dot_)bell-labs(_dot_)com'
Subject:      Issues raised in opes-enforcement and 
opes-threat conference call

Hi all,

This is my attempt to summarize some of the issues raised 
during the opes-enforcement and opes-threat conference call 
this morning, with the hope to get a discussion going in the 
mailing lists. So, please provide your comments.

Basically, the team agreed to go for the enforcement draft 
first. In the meeting, there are at least these four issues 
discussed, which should all be included in the enforcement draft. 

1. There is a proposal that we have encryption at all points 
in the OPES architecture. The supporting view is that for 
environment such as in a VPN, they already have network layer 
security, for instance, using IPSec. But there is also fear 
that making this a requirement would scare implementors away. 
Then again, there is also a view saying that IPSec is kind of 
gaining momentum. 

2. Regarding authorization of OPES devices, do we need to 
define a separate protocol, or do we just specify the 
requirements and let the implementors decide on what they want to use.

3. Granularity of authorization. How fine-grained should the 
authorization be? On one end of the spectrum, we can 
authorize individual OPES devices. Once authorized, the OPES 
device can perform any kind of transformation. On the other 
end, we can have service by service authorization, or even 
per-request authorization. 

4. Should end-user only authorization be supported? For 
instance, if a data consumer wants to perform language 
translation to the web page he/she requests, should he/she be 
the one who would authorize the OPES device which performs 
the transformation. Should the content provider be notified 
that the content they provide is being modified? There are 
some copyright issues in there, since the transformation may 
have already infringed the copyright of the content owner. 

If I left out anything, I hope the team would add to it. 
Again, we would like to get a discussion going regarding 
these issues, so please don't hestitate to provide your 
valuable comments. 

Best Regards,

Tat Chan
Senior Reserach Engineer
Nokia Research Center
NOKIA INC
5 Wayside Road, Burlington, MA 01803
Phone (781) 993-5776, Fax (781) 993-1907
tat(_dot_)chan(_at_)nokia(_dot_)com


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>