[Dime] Need to know the location of a roaming peer?
Sebastien Decugis <sdecugis@nict.go.jp> Tue, 17 November 2009 05:22 UTC
Return-Path: <sdecugis@nict.go.jp>
X-Original-To: dime@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dime@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DD853A689C for <dime@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Nov 2009 21:22:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.059
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.059 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.185, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244]
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 0bN8Rmn4RKev for <dime@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Nov 2009 21:22:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ns1.nict.go.jp (ns1.nict.go.jp [IPv6:2001:2f8:29::2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40E573A6858 for <dime@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Nov 2009 21:22:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gw1.nict.go.jp (gw1 [133.243.18.250]) by ns1.nict.go.jp with ESMTP id nAH5M5hf018541 for <dime@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:22:05 +0900 (JST)
Received: from gw1.nict.go.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gw1.nict.go.jp with ESMTP id nAH5M5LM020647 for <dime@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:22:05 +0900 (JST)
Received: from mail2.nict.go.jp (mail.nict.go.jp [133.243.18.3]) by gw1.nict.go.jp with ESMTP id nAH5M59V020644 for <dime@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:22:05 +0900 (JST)
Received: from mail2.nict.go.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.nict.go.jp (NICT Mail) with ESMTP id 1F9B515FD2 for <dime@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:22:05 +0900 (JST)
Received: from [133.243.146.206] (5gou2f-dhcp46.nict.go.jp [133.243.146.206]) by mail2.nict.go.jp (NICT Mail) with ESMTP id 1A2B115F94 for <dime@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:22:05 +0900 (JST)
Message-ID: <4B0232F5.3030805@nict.go.jp>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:21:57 +0900
From: Sebastien Decugis <sdecugis@nict.go.jp>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dime@ietf.org
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0
OpenPGP: id=33D9F61D
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Dime] Need to know the location of a roaming peer?
X-BeenThere: dime@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Diameter Maintanence and Extentions Working Group <dime.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime>, <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dime>
List-Post: <mailto:dime@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime>, <mailto:dime-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 05:22:09 -0000
Hello all, During the last meeting (thanks Hannes and Jouni for the minutes) there was a discussion about the need (or absence of need) to notify the home domain when a peer changes its authenticator in a visited domain. During the discussion on ERP, my understanding of the conclusion was that we should do the re-authentication locally when possible in the visited domain, without going back to home domain. Then, in case new authorization attributes are needed, we have a separate exchange with the home realm to fetch these fresh authorization attributes, after the authentication is performed. Later during the session, a remark on emergency services (related to Diameter Parameter Query draft if I am not mistaken) sent the question back on the table, highlighting that in some contexts we may want to query the home server for the current location of the user. I am wondering, if the peer can move without the home server being notified (we assume server-initiated messages are routed transparently to the correct recipient) then the design of such query mechanism will be affected and complexity added. I would like to ask the list if there is strong concerns with "hiding" the current authenticator of a roaming user to the home server, the result being that the home realm only knows the current location with a granularity of the realm (inter-realm handovers should still have to go to the home realm, AFAIU). PS: I am wondering, in the context of emergency services, if we are really interested by the authenticator or by the point of attachment for the given peer, as I understand there is a difference in some deployment schemes... Thank you for any comment, Best regards, Sebastien. -- Sebastien Decugis Research fellow Network Architecture Group NICT (nict.go.jp)