Re: [Ecrit] draft-ietf-ecrit-unauthenticated-access-03

Henning Schulzrinne <hgs@cs.columbia.edu> Wed, 16 November 2011 15:17 UTC

Return-Path: <hgs@cs.columbia.edu>
X-Original-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1AFA21F9014 for <ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 07:17:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iQ+YsWSNAQvx for <ecrit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 07:17:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from brinza.cc.columbia.edu (brinza.cc.columbia.edu [128.59.29.8]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28E9A21F90A8 for <ecrit@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Nov 2011 07:17:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from upstairs-3.home (pool-96-242-116-37.nwrknj.fios.verizon.net [96.242.116.37]) (user=hgs10 mech=PLAIN bits=0) by brinza.cc.columbia.edu (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id pAGFHdkX021186 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Wed, 16 Nov 2011 10:17:40 -0500 (EST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Henning Schulzrinne <hgs@cs.columbia.edu>
In-Reply-To: <58EF06B3-2C98-4FD6-91F0-A9A15820A909@gmx.net>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 10:17:38 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <896B3758-85FC-4E99-B8CC-B32608567AFB@cs.columbia.edu>
References: <58EF06B3-2C98-4FD6-91F0-A9A15820A909@gmx.net>
To: Hannes Tschofenig <Hannes.Tschofenig@gmx.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1)
X-No-Spam-Score: Local
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 128.59.29.8
Cc: ECRIT Org <ecrit@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Ecrit] draft-ietf-ecrit-unauthenticated-access-03
X-BeenThere: ecrit@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ecrit.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ecrit>
List-Post: <mailto:ecrit@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit>, <mailto:ecrit-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 15:17:44 -0000

2) HotSpot 2.0 should help with that problem in the longer run. (Indeed, our requirements might shape the evolution of that effort, particularly if we can reach out to that group.)

On Nov 16, 2011, at 10:01 AM, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:

> Hi all, 
> 
> in today's ECRIT meeting there was not enough time to discuss the details of the open issues. We also spent a lot of time on justifying the draft even though we had made that decision already a long time ago. 
> 
> In any case, here are the open issues: 
> 
> 1) No Access Authentication (NAA)
> 
> I suggested to address the fraud problem that results from a host that attaches to a network using some special link layer authentication procedure without actually having credentials for that specific network by not routing the emergency calls via the VSP but instead contacting the PSAP directly. 
> 
> From the feedback during the meeting I believe folks are fine with that approach but are looking forward to see the details. 
> 
> 2) Deployment Reality
> 
> Bernard and Martin had some comments about the current deployment limitations of many access networks. For example, many hotspots require user interactions prior to get network access granted. There is not really anything we can do about it other than mentioning the challenges in a limitation section. I suggested to introduce such a section. 
> 
> 3) Lack of authorization to perform network access
> 
> The document currently considers the Zero-Balance ASP where an emergency caller is not authorized to make the emergency call. This lack of authorization is visible at the application layer. Bernard suggested to add a discussion about lack of authorization at the network layer as well. 
> I am OK with adding such text. 
> 
> 4) Writing Style
> 
> Martin suggested to restructure the document, i.e. to change the writing style. I would like to leave the structure at the moment as is.
> 
> Ciao
> Hannes
> _______________________________________________
> Ecrit mailing list
> Ecrit@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit
>