Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-mip6-integrated
jouni <jouni.nospam@gmail.com> Sun, 07 December 2008 10:33 UTC
Return-Path: <aaa-doctors-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: aaa-doctors-archive@optimus.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-aaa-doctors-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEBC73A67E5; Sun, 7 Dec 2008 02:33:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA09E3A67A5 for <aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Dec 2008 02:33:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lviEnTw30+Ct for <aaa-doctors@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Dec 2008 02:33:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gw02.mail.saunalahti.fi (gw02.mail.saunalahti.fi [195.197.172.116]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0F753A63CB for <aaa-doctors@ietf.org>; Sun, 7 Dec 2008 02:33:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from a88-114-66-140.elisa-laajakaista.fi (a88-114-66-140.elisa-laajakaista.fi [88.114.66.140]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gw02.mail.saunalahti.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94B331397DE; Sun, 7 Dec 2008 12:32:55 +0200 (EET)
Message-Id: <FB0CE16C-EE8F-458C-9DAC-E6BA25E4E89A@gmail.com>
From: jouni <jouni.nospam@gmail.com>
To: Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com
In-Reply-To: <1696498986EFEC4D9153717DA325CB72027AC6A5@vaebe104.NOE.Nokia.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v929.2)
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2008 12:32:54 +0200
References: <EDC652A26FB23C4EB6384A4584434A040114D70E@307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com> <1696498986EFEC4D9153717DA325CB720261A77D@vaebe104.NOE.Nokia.com> <EDC652A26FB23C4EB6384A4584434A0401182A7B@307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com> <1696498986EFEC4D9153717DA325CB720261AEF9@vaebe104.NOE.Nokia.com> <EDC652A26FB23C4EB6384A4584434A0401182C49@307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com> <005101c94ffd$d841c940$88c55bc0$@net> <1696498986EFEC4D9153717DA325CB7202650116@vaebe104.NOE.Nokia.com> <492E99F6.8030703@piuha.net> <6CF039C5B32037498B02251E11CDE6B0078740F8@ftrdmel3> <1696498986EFEC4D9153717DA325CB7202706228@vaebe104.NOE.Nokia.com> <3fe59bfe0812020417x7b7394fbmd618ced601689558@mail.gmail.com> <1696498986EFEC4D9153717DA325CB72027AC6A5@vaebe104.NOE.Nokia.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.929.2)
Cc: "kchowdhury@starentnetworks.com Chowdhury" <kchowdhury@starentnetworks.com>, aaa-doctors@ietf.org, jouni.korhonen@nsn.com, "julien.bournelle@orange-ftgroup." <julien.bournelle@orange-ftgroup.com>, charliep@wichorus.com
Subject: Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-mip6-integrated
X-BeenThere: aaa-doctors@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: AAA Doctors E-mail List <aaa-doctors.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aaa-doctors>, <mailto:aaa-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/aaa-doctors>
List-Post: <mailto:aaa-doctors@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:aaa-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aaa-doctors>, <mailto:aaa-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"; DelSp="yes"
Sender: aaa-doctors-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: aaa-doctors-bounces@ietf.org
Pasi, On Dec 5, 2008, at 2:06 PM, <Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com> <Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com > wrote: > Jouni, > > Thanks for the pointers! > > I took a look at these specs, and it seems they're using only some > parts of draft-ietf-dime-mip6-integrated. Hopefully you found the latest ones. At least those on 3GPP site that I found, were 1-2 meeting cycles behind (checked this morning the official specs download pages). Anyway, other SDOs who picked up this standards track I-D, are still according to my limited knowledge completely align with the I-D (even if they may not use all possible features). > None of these seem to describe a case where information about more > than one Home Agent is sent (which would benefit from grouped AVPs), > and neither use the MIP6-Home-Link-Prefix AVP. (29.273 Section 9.2.2 > ABNF does allow more than one MIP6-Agent-Info AVP, but the text > doesn't describe any other case than a single PDN GW.) > > Do you know if e.g. 3GPP plans to add more semantics from dime-mip6- > integrated to these specs? Or is dime-mip6-integrated actually > describing more functionality than other SDOs are currently planning > to use? I cannot say what other SDOs plan to do in the future. Current I-D describes more functionality what the above spec decided to use at the moment. However, whether they e.g. end up signaling one or more "agent infos" is allowed by current the I-D. That's up to their deployment view, which might not be the same for others in the future. Cheers, Jouni > > Best regards, > Pasi > > From: ext jouni korhonen [mailto:jouni.nospam@gmail.com] > Sent: 02 December, 2008 14:18 > To: Eronen Pasi (Nokia-NRC/Helsinki) > Cc: julien.bournelle@orange-ftgroup.com; jari.arkko@piuha.net; kchowdhury@starentnetworks.com > ; aaa-doctors@ietf.org; Korhonen Jouni (NSN - FI/Espoo); charliep@wichorus.com > ; jouni.korhonen@teliasonera.com > Subject: Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-mip6- > integrated > > in 3GPP 29.272, 29.273 and in 3gpp2 X.P0047.. > > > > On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 1:05 PM, <Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com> wrote: > Julien and Jouni, > > Could you provide a pointer to 3GPP specs that define how these > AVPs are used in 3GPP? > > I tried searching, but found nothing except 23.402, which only > mentions this draft in a single sentence. Presumably, the details > of exactly which of the AVPs are used and how are in some Stage 3 > spec, but I can't seem to find it... > > Best regards, > Pasi > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ext julien.bournelle@orange-ftgroup.com > > [mailto:julien.bournelle@orange-ftgroup.com] > > Sent: 27 November, 2008 15:17 > > To: jari.arkko@piuha.net; Eronen Pasi (Nokia-NRC/Helsinki) > > Cc: glenzorn@comcast.net; dromasca@avaya.com; > > jouni.korhonen@teliasonera.com; Korhonen Jouni (NSN - > > FI/Espoo); aaa-doctors@ietf.org; charliep@wichorus.com; > > kchowdhury@starentnetworks.com > > Subject: RE: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of > > draft-ietf-dime-mip6-integrated > > > > Dear all, > > > > Thanks for your clarifications, I think I better understand > > your concern now. You are true > > that we are not defining a new Diameter application here and > > that finally we just add AVPs to Diameter EAP/NASREQ. In particular > > the MIP6-Agent-Info AVP of Type Grouped. From my point of view, > > this AVP makes sense from a Diameter point of view and I'm not > > really confortable to split it to ease Diameter/RADIUS translation. > > > > First, I'm not sure that the most common deployment case will have > > to translate between RADIUS-MIP6 and Diameter MIP6 integrated. As > > you know, 3GPP does not use RADIUS MIP6. It would be interesting > > to see if someone has a valid scenario. > > > > Second, Diameter NASREQ/EAP already have some Grouped AVPs. So > > the translation agent already have to cope with this. > > > > SO, I think that your comment is really valid and that we could > > probably add a recommandation somewhere in RFC3588Bis but I'm not > > sure that this could be a MUST. > > > > Regards, > > > > Julien > > > > > -----Message d'origine----- > > > De : Jari Arkko [mailto:jari.arkko@piuha.net] > > > Envoyé : jeudi 27 novembre 2008 14:01 > > > À : Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com > > > Cc : glenzorn@comcast.net; dromasca@avaya.com; BOURNELLE > > > Julien RD-CORE-ISS; jouni.korhonen@teliasonera.com; > > > jouni.korhonen@nsn.com; aaa-doctors@ietf.org; > > > charliep@wichorus.com; kchowdhury@starentnetworks.com > > > Objet : Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of > > > draft-ietf-dime-mip6-integrated > > > > > > What he said. > > > > > > jari > > > > > > Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com wrote: > > > > Glen Zorn wrote: > > > > > > > >>> Folks, > > > >>> > > > >>> Nothing in this thread so far has come to even close to > > > answering my > > > >>> main concern: specifying two similar solutions (and > translation > > > >>> between them) means more complexity and more work. Why is this > > > >>> complexity and work needed? > > > >>> > > > >> Which complexity and work would that be? Translation > > > between RADIUS > > > >> and Diameter cannot be avoided, if that's the problem you see. > > > >> > > > > > > > > We're clearly not on the same page here. Let me try to > > > explain why I > > > > believe why this is unnecessary complexity and work: > > > > > > > > Consider another draft that has been discussed in RADEXT: > > > > draft-aboba-radext-wlan. It would be possible to write a new > > > > Internet-Draft that would define Diameter AVPs (in >255 range, > > > > possibly using grouped AVPs and other Diameter-only features) > for > > > > exactly the same purpose. > > > > > > > > I am claiming this would be a very bad idea, because it > > would mean > > > > more complexity and more work, and with little benefits. > > > > > > > > When you're defining attributes for use in existing > > > messages (no new > > > > Diameter application or anything), IMHO it should be done > > > in the 0-255 > > > > range, even if that means Diameter features like grouping > > > need to be > > > > avoided. > > > > > > > > If I understand your position right, you're saying it would > > > be OK to > > > > have two different numbers for e.g. the Allowed-Called-Station- > Id > > > > attribute? > > > > > > > > > > > >>> So far, I have heard only explanations about how this > > > situation came > > > >>> to happen: somewhere down the line, two WGs ended up > > > taking on the > > > >>> work, and one of them (DIME) made decisions that made > > > sense locally > > > >>> (when considering only Diameter aspects), and their > > draft came to > > > >>> IESG first. > > > >>> Interestingly enough, the other WG (MEXT) has been working > on a > > > >>> RADIUS+Diameter solution (not a RADIUS-only solution!), > > > >>> > > > >> Any work using RADIUS Attributes from the standard > > > typespace may be > > > >> trivially claimed to be a "RADIUS+Diameter solution" if no > > > >> translation other than that specified in RFC 4005 & RFC 3588 is > > > >> performed. > > > >> > > > > > > > > Yes. And I think such solutions often make sense. > > > > > > > > > > > >> In fact, however, draft-ietf-mip6-radius-06.txt (if that > > > is what you > > > >> are referring to) requires further translation: "MIP6-HA and > > > >> HOA-IPv6 must be translated between their RADIUS > > representation of > > > >> String to a Diameter Address format which requires that the > > > >> AddressType field be set to 2 for IP6 (IP version 6)". > > > >> > > > > > > > > That's a bad design choice in mip6-radius-06 that could be > easily > > > > fixed. If it used the same approach as was used for e.g. > > > > Framed-IP-Address, no translation (beyond copying) would > > be needed. > > > > > > > > > > > >> Furthermore, a pretty good case could be made that the draft in > > > >> question is not only not a "RADIUS+Diameter solution", but > > > not even a > > > >> "RADIUS-only solution" due to the novel semantics it > > > assigns to the > > > >> Access-Accept message. > > > >> > > > > > > > > The "novel semantics" probably refer to the "split > > > scenario" (which is > > > > indeed more complex, and could be in a separate document). > > > > > > > > > > > >>> and if they had sent their document to IESG first, we > > > probably would > > > >>> not even consider publishing draft-ietf-dime-mip6-integrated. > > > >>> > > > >> It didn't get to the IESG first because it's not ready for > prime > > > >> time. I do find it interesting that a Security Area Director > is > > > >> ready to approve a document with such weak security properties, > > > >> however. > > > >> > > > > > > > > The "weak security properties" refer to the "split > > scenario". The > > > > "integrated scenario" are ready for prime time, and are > > > delayed only > > > > by editorial decision to keep them in the same text file. > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Pasi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > AAA-DOCTORS mailing list > AAA-DOCTORS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aaa-doctors > > _______________________________________________ AAA-DOCTORS mailing list AAA-DOCTORS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aaa-doctors
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… Bernard Aboba
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… Glen Zorn
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… Pasi.Eronen
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… Jari Arkko
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… Pasi.Eronen
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… julien.bournelle
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… Bernard Aboba
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… Jari Arkko
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… Bernard Aboba
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… Pasi.Eronen
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… jouni korhonen
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… Pasi.Eronen
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… jouni
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… Pasi.Eronen
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… Jari Arkko
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… jouni korhonen
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… lionel.morand
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… jouni
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… Tina TSOU
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… Tina TSOU
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… jouni korhonen
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… Pasi.Eronen
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… jouni korhonen
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… Pasi.Eronen
- Re: [AAA-DOCTORS] New version of draft-ietf-dime-… jouni korhonen