Last Modifield: 06/24/2002
But while the formatting and transfer of such information is in some sense a straightforward process, the implications of doing it, especially in regards to privacy and security, are anything but.
The primary task of this working group will be to assess the the authorization, integrity and privacy requirements that must be met in order to transfer such information, or authorize the release or representation of such information through an agent.
In addition, the working group will select an already standardized format to recommend for use in representing location per se. A key task will be to enhance this format and protocol approaches using the enhanced format, to ensure that the security and privacy methods are available to diverse location-aware applications. Approaches to be considered will include (among others) data formats incorporating fields directing the privacy handling of the location information and possible methods of specifying variable precision of location.
Also to be considered will be: authorization of requestors and responders; authorization of proxies (for instance, the ability to authorize a carrier to reveal what timezone one is in, but not what city. An approach to the taxonomy of requestors, as well as to the resolution or precision of information given them, will be part of this deliverable.
The combination of these elements should provide a service capable of transferring geographic location information in a private and secure fashion (including the option of denying transfer).
For reasons of both future interoperability and assurance of the security and privacy goals, it is a goal of the working group to deliver a specification that has broad applicablity and will become mandatory to implement for IETF protocols that are location-aware.
Two further deliverables of the WG will be:
o An example API for application-level access to/management of link-based location information. That is, for instance, the WG may describe an API for secure, privacy-enabling user/ application handling of location information specific to a 3G wireless link technology.
o Development of i-ds that make security and privacy integral to location information in HTTP and HTML, based on the work in draft-daviel-html-geo-tag-05.txt and draft-daviel-http-geo-header-03.txt.
Out of Scope:
This WG won't develop location-determining technology. It will work from existing technologies and where the technology is undeveloped, will state that applicability may await others' developments.
This WG won't develop technology to support any particular regulatory requirement [e.g. E.911] but will provide a framework that might be used for private/secure definition of such technologies by other bodies.
Coordination:
The WG will coordinate with other WGs developing general privacy and location-aware functions, e.g. the SIP WG, so that the WG deliverables can be used by them. Other coordination should include the NymIP research community, WC3, and the Location Information Forum.
| JUN 02 | Discuss initial geopriv scenarios and application requirements i-d's | |
| JUN 02 | Discuss initial geographic location privacy and security requirements i-d. | |
| AUG 02 | Initial i-d on geographic information protocol design, including privacy and security techniques. | |
| AUG 02 | Review charter and initial i-ds with AD, and have IESG consider rechartering if necessary. | |
| AUG 02 | Submit geopriv scenarios and application requirements to IESG for publicaiton as Informational RFCs | |
| SEP 02 | Submit security/privacy requirements I-D to IESG for publication as Informational RFC. | |
| SEP 02 | Use initial framework to restructure drafts on geographic information in HTTP and HTML so that location security and privacy are integral. | |
| DEC 02 | Use initial framework to develop an example location/privacy API that might be used in a 3G handset or other consumer application. | |
| JAN 03 | Submit geopriv protocol, geopriv http, geopriv html, and handset example draft to IESG for publication as standards track RFCs (except for example draft, submitted as Informational) | |
| MAR 03 | Conclude working group, unless ADs determine added work is needed |