Re: Fwd: ULE SEC REQ draft rev -03

[Michael Noisternig <mnoist@cosy.sbg.ac.at>]

Hi,

> I Agree with Prashants view on this. The reason being it is already 
> mentioned in the draft that wired links are difficult to intercept. IMO 

Right. But my point was not to state once more that the wireless ULE 
broadcast link is more vulnerable but to present a showcase where there 
is no way to enforce end-to-end security, and thus to point out more 
explicitely that a solution for securing the ULE link only is very 
desirable.
This is in contrast to the current draft which only says
"...if authentication of the end-point i.e. the IP Sources is required,
       or users are concerned about loss of confidentiality, integrity
       or authenticity of their communication data, they will have to
       employ end-to-end network security mechanisms like IPSec or
       Transport Layer Security (TLS)."

> this case is very confusing without adding much to the draft. I propose 
> we let it be as it is. If there are no further comments we are going to 
> submit this version for the last call.
>
>
> Best Regards
> Sunny