RE: stds-802-handoff: Addressing Security, was : Thursday Handoff meeting time.
Clint,
Being a study group, whether or not we address security is a matter for
debate until we agree on a PAR. However I feel that there is some
consensus as to how far security needs to be addressed. Please correct
me if I'm wrong on that..
1) We should not define security algorithms. That is for crypto experts.
2) We should not define security protocols. That is addressed elsewhere.
Adding more will not help matters.
3) Security protocols and procedures may benefit from information that
can be made available through handoff mechanisms we hypothetically might
design. So we would be correct to analyse the likely needs of the
security protocols defined elsewhere and make sure we don't break them,
and if possible enable them to work in a handoff scenario.
Put more succinctly, we are here to do handoff stuff, handoff stuff is
to some extent linked to security activities and we need to take that
into account, but getting into defining security protocols would be
overstepping the mark.
DJ
David Johnston
Intel Corporation
Chair, IEEE 802 Handoff ECSG
Email : dj.johnston@intel.com
Tel : 503 380 5578 (Mobile)
Tel : 503 264 3855 (Office)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Clint Chaplin [mailto:cchaplin@sj.symbol.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 5:47 PM
> To: stds-802-handoff@ieee.org; Johnston, Dj
> Subject: Re: stds-802-handoff: Thursday Handoff meeting time.
>
>
> You'll probably tell me if I am wrong, but didn't I overhear
> that security would >not< be addressed by this SG? And if
> so, was this because of the lack of expertiese in the SG, or
> for other reasons?
>
>
> Clint (JOATMON) Chaplin
>