Subject: AW: [Simple] New partial publish draft

From: Schmidt Christian <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 15:03:18 +0200

Hi Aki,

I like it, it is short and pregnant. Nevertheless some ideas:

- What about PDIF extensions, for example RPID, CIPID ...? Could this paper cover partial publish for other presence related informations as well? Would there be a need for a partial-rpid format draft? What extensions would be necessary in your draft?

- Additional integrity issue in security section: In case of a partial publish, somebody in the middle could just shorten the publish. The PA would have problems with integrity protection in this case. He can not distinguish, a data element is missing because it is unchanged or taken away by a man in the middle.

- An example, describing the efficiency benefit of partial publish could motivate.

Regards,
Christian

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] Im Auftrag von Aki Niemi
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 28. Oktober 2004 10:35
An: SIMPLE WG
Betreff: [Simple] New partial publish draft

All,

A new version of the partial publication draft is available. Until it
appears in the archives, a copy has been placed at:

http://people.nokia.net/~aki/drafts/draft-ietf-simple-partial-publish-01.txt

Changes:

- This version uses the updated partial-format, meaning that rather than
working on a per tuple basis, the PUA can make finer-grained granular
updates to the presence information.

- Initial publications now contain full-state using the normal PIDF
format. Clients will also fall back to PIDF if a partial update receives
a 415 error response.

Comments most welcome.

Cheers,
Aki

_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple

_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple

---

From: Aki Niemi <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 20:24:43 +0300

On Thu, 2004-10-28 at 16:03, ext Schmidt Christian wrote:
> - What about PDIF extensions, for example RPID, CIPID ...? Could this
> paper cover partial publish for other presence related informations as
> well? Would there be a need for a partial-rpid format draft? What
> extensions would be necessary in your draft?

None. The current partial format makes no assumptions about the data
itself, except that it's well-formed XML. In fact, you could partially
update any XML document, so current PIDF extensions are certainly
already covered.

> - Additional integrity issue in security section: In case of a partial
> publish, somebody in the middle could just shorten the publish. The PA
> would have problems with integrity protection in this case. He can not
> distinguish, a data element is missing because it is unchanged or
> taken away by a man in the middle.

Correct, but the issue is really no different from a MITM stripping
elements off of a full PIDF document. In other words, without integrity
protection, the publications are subject to the same security threats as
with the default PIDF format.

> - An example, describing the efficiency benefit of partial publish

Good suggestion. Expect the next version to include an example.

Cheers,
Aki