Re: Is the IP layer the right place to support location information

["EXT C. Wegrzyn" <wegrzyn@garbagedump.com>]

Randy,

 So as not make this a long conversation. You lawyer is wrong about the
fundamental right to anonymous communication in the U.S.  The Supreme Court
had a ruling within the last 6 months or a year that reinforced the idea
that anonymous communication was a fundamental freedom of every American.
The case was a Ohio vs. some woman I believe. It involved the circulation of
a pamphlet that stated a position that wasn't the majority. The Supreme
Court ruled that the ordinance was illegal.

Chuck Wegrzyn

----- Original Message -----
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: C Wegrzyn <wegrzyn@garbagedump.com>
Cc: <ext-ip-location@research.nokia.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2000 1:31 PM
Subject: Re: Is the IP layer the right place to support location information


> >>> In my mind, the location information is something that isn't broadcast
> >>> continually but is something that can be queried when needed. Where
does
> >>> it exist in the IP/TCP stack? I would make the suggestion that it is
at
> >>> the ICMP layer. This would allow it to be queried rather cheaply by
some
> >>> host whether it was a router, a DNS lookup routine, or whatever.
> >> how easy is it to apply privacy and security criteria in icmp?
> >  As I mentioned in a just posted email, I think this is an important
issue.
> > I would hope that whatever is designed will provide a mechanism to allow
the
> > user to turn it off. Anonymous communication is an important feature of
the
> > Internet, and a fundamental right in the U.S. (and maybe other places as
> > well).
>
> i suspect that, if location-based services become interesting, i will not
> want to enable/disable en masse, but rather authorize disclosure of my
> information based on the identity of the querier, my knowledge of what
> services i may have requested, etc. etc.
>
> my lawyer does not agree with your lawyer that there is a _fundamental
> right_ to anonymous communication in us law.
>
> randy
>