RE: Clearinghouse/Aggregator Support for CUI

["Adrangi, Farid" <farid.adrangi@intel.com>]

Hi Alan,

The CUI does not have to reveal the user's real identity.  However, at
the end of the day, it is the operator's choice.  "opaque string" type
is one way to maintain user's anonymity as you noted -- but I guess you
could also do this with the NAI format -- e.g., 1234@example.com  where
1234 is not the user's real identity, no?  

Regarding to a suggested "best practices" for format, are you suggesting
that the draft should recommend one of the specified formats, or suggest
a format for the "opaque string"?

BR,
Farid


> "Alan DeKok" <aland@ox.org> wrote:
> 
>   My one concern about the CUI is privacy.  We may want intermediaries
> to not know the identity, but to still have a unique "token" which may
> be used to bill the home network.  The "opaque string" type is good
> for this purpose, but it would be good to include a suggested "best
> practices" for format.
> 
>   Alan DeKok.
> 
> --
> to unsubscribe send a message to radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with
> the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
> archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>
> 

--
to unsubscribe send a message to radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>