Re: [Dime] DiME ERP: new Application ID or not ? (non-roaming case)

"Hannes Tschofenig" <Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net> Sat, 07 March 2009 11:34 UTC

Return-Path: <Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net>
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 9CD843A6885 for <dime@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 7 Mar 2009 03:34:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.345
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.345 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.254, 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 B5PKsuo2IbkJ for <dime@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 7 Mar 2009 03:34:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 3BFB23A699D for <dime@ietf.org>; Sat, 7 Mar 2009 03:34:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 07 Mar 2009 11:35:13 -0000
Received: from a91-154-108-144.elisa-laajakaista.fi (EHLO 4FIL42860) [91.154.108.144] by mail.gmx.net (mp015) with SMTP; 07 Mar 2009 12:35:13 +0100
X-Authenticated: #29516787
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19RUqdlRCVRIrrXCBZnx+6P1sSS4JAA4+c/uJNph1 8F4fRgdOBiPj2h
From: Hannes Tschofenig <Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net>
To: 'Julien Bournelle' <julien.bournelle@gmail.com>
References: <5e2406980903032305k48ad83b7r1015e61c6ed983ae@mail.gmail.com> <020e01c99ca1$3b704150$2fb4b70a@nsnintra.net> <5e2406980903040203i26ab161bs3f221dc4ac03ed7@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 13:36:17 +0200
Message-ID: <021601c99f18$ee622250$0201a8c0@nsnintra.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
Thread-Index: AcmcsHizGa06V29eRmCTub5khVECOQCZiQ9g
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350
In-Reply-To: <5e2406980903040203i26ab161bs3f221dc4ac03ed7@mail.gmail.com>
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
X-FuHaFi: 0.5
Cc: dime@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Dime] DiME ERP: new Application ID or not ? (non-roaming case)
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: Sat, 07 Mar 2009 11:34:44 -0000

I also have to add ... 

If you define a new Diameter Application ID then you have to decide which
application to use as a baseline. If you look at Section 5.1 of
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dime-mip6-split-16.txt then
you see that the Mobile IPv6 specific AVPs are optional in the Command Code
ABNF. Hence, building on EAP is probably not such a bad idea. 

There is also the question how much you want to say about Mobile IPv6
bootstrapping in the ERP document.

Ciao
Hannes

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Julien Bournelle [mailto:julien.bournelle@gmail.com] 
>Sent: 04 March, 2009 12:03
>To: Hannes Tschofenig
>Cc: dime@ietf.org
>Subject: Re: [Dime] DiME ERP: new Application ID or not ? 
>(non-roaming case)
>
>hi hannes,
>
> see inline,
>
>On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 9:14 AM, Hannes Tschofenig 
><Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net> wrote:
>> Hi Julien,
>>
>> When we discussed this at the phone conference call (and the 
>> discussion is also captured in the meeting minutes) then I thought 
>> that the conclusion was to define a new Diameter application 
>for this exchange:
>>
>>
>>   Peer               Authenticator                      Server
>>   ====               =============                      ======
>>
>>    [<-- EAP-Initiate/ -----
>>        Re-auth-Start]
>>    [<-- EAP-Request/ ------
>>        Identity]
>>
>>
>>    ---- EAP-Initiate/ ----> ----AAA(EAP-Initiate/ ---------->
>>          Re-auth/                  Re-auth/
>>         [Bootstrap]              [Bootstrap])
>>
>>    <--- EAP-Finish/ ------> <---AAA(rMSK,EAP-Finish/---------
>>          Re-auth/                   Re-auth/
>>        [Bootstrap]                [Bootstrap])
>>
>>   Note: [] brackets indicate optionality.
>>
>>                          Figure 2: ERP Exchange
>>
>> (The server in the figure above is the HOKEY server, a dedicated 
>> entity.)
>>
>>
>> The initial EAP authentication is left untouched and, as Glen 
>> explained us, there is the assumption that the AAA entities work 
>> together with the HOKEY servers in a non-standardized way. 
>To me that sounded like a good plan.
>>
>> Does this make any sense?
>
> Taking into accounts that we have one app-id for Diameter EAP 
>(I would say NASREQ-EAP) AND soon another app-id for Diameter 
>MIP6 (which also use EAP for authentication). It certainly 
>make sense to not reuse the same App-ID for ERP if we want to 
>use ERP for the mip6 case.
>
> Let's see if others have opinion.
>
> Regards,
>
> Julien
>
>>
>>
>> The non-HOKEY expert
>> Hannes
>>
>> PS: I never said that this is specific document is going to 
>be trivial 
>> :-)
>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: dime-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dime-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf 
>>>Of Julien Bournelle
>>>Sent: 04 March, 2009 09:05
>>>To: dime@ietf.org
>>>Subject: [Dime] DiME ERP: new Application ID or not ?
>>>(non-roaming case)
>>>
>>>Hi all,
>>>
>>> we try to solve the issue concerning the need for a new 
>App-Id or not.
>>>
>>> The ERP protocol (RFC 5296) is to be used along with EAP. It 
>>>basically defines two new EAP codes and uses keying material derived 
>>>from a first EAP authentication.
>>>
>>> To start the discussion, let's take the non-roaming case.
>>>
>>> In non-roaming, we have first an EAP authentication using Diameter 
>>>EAP.
>>> Then, for reauthentication using ERP, we have two messages
>>>(Request/Response)  between NAS and the AAA/ERP server carrying EAP 
>>>packets
>>>
>>> See (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5296#page-6)
>>>
>>> So, either we reuse the Diameter EAP Application (DER/DEA) or we 
>>>define a new Diameter Application.
>>>
>>> If we use a new Diameter Application, a new Diameter 
>session will be 
>>>created and eventually a new Diameter server will be reached. What 
>>>bothers me in this case is that we basically perform a 
>>>reauthentication for the same session which is primarly 
>handled at the 
>>>AAA/EAP server. So, i'm wondering what happens concerning 
>>>Authorization Lifetime session etc..
>>>
>>> Note that I still don't have strong opinion and I'll be 
>glad to hear 
>>>opinions from others.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Julien
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>DiME mailing list
>>>DiME@ietf.org
>>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime
>>>
>>
>>
>