| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
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