Re: [802.21] Security study group
Hello Rahul,
Thank you for review.
To my mind, the MN should select a 'preferred' MIHF. I agree with your
comment: it is better to use the term 'preferred' because the use of
the term ' most trusted' requires an explicit definition of a trust
model and quantitative trust metrics.
Best regards,
Maryna
RAHUL SINHA a écrit :
>
> Hello Michael,
>
> Your comments (sent on Jan 15) on my review of the TR were fine with
> me. I hope Maryna can still comment on the following:
>
>
>
> *3. MIH Level Security*
>
>
>
> *3.1.1 General Requirements*
>
> Under MIH based access control, “In some implementations the MN
> MIHF should be able to select the most well known IS MIHF among
> all available”
>
> [Rahul Sinha] <<The term ‘well known’ is not clear. If ‘most
> trusted’ is what is meant here, then a reputation score needs to
> be assigned to IS MIHF based on previous transactions.>>
>
>
>
> [Michael Williams] Agree the term is not a security term. Maryna
> may comment more, but if the IS is a service where several MIHF's
> are available, the MN should pick its preferred one for the given
> scenario. Does changing from well known to preferred work?
>
> [Rahul Sinha]: I guess selecting a 'preferred' IS MIHF is OK. This
> leaves the actual selection criterion implementation dependent.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Rahul
>
> ------- *Original Message* -------
> *Sender* : Michael G Williams<Michael.G.Williams@NOKIA.COM>
> *Date* : Jan 28, 2008 20:51 (GMT+09:00)
> *Title* : [802.21] Security study group
>
> Have there been any emails or private exchanges on the work for this
> group?
>
> There was some discussion of the TR document, is it resolved now?
>
> BR,
> Michael
>