IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Hipsec] comments on draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis-01

Robert Moskowitz <rgm@htt-consult.com> Fri, 25 February 2011 17:41 UTC

Return-Path: <rgm@htt-consult.com>
X-Original-To: hipsec@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hipsec@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D0BC3A69E7 for <hipsec@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 09:41:04 -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=[AWL=0.000, 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 UWbQ1I2v7bmE for <hipsec@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 09:41:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from klovia.htt-consult.com (klovia.htt-consult.com [208.83.67.149]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 482E63A693A for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 09:41:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by klovia.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6B8062A45; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 17:41:29 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at localhost
Received: from klovia.htt-consult.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (klovia.htt-consult.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6pxGQFtcAlZA; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 12:41:04 -0500 (EST)
Received: from nc2400.htt-consult.com (nc2400.htt-consult.com [208.83.67.155]) (Authenticated sender: rgm@htt-consult.com) by klovia.htt-consult.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1D20962AAA; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 12:41:04 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <4D67E9AF.7030208@htt-consult.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 12:41:03 -0500
From: Robert Moskowitz <rgm@htt-consult.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101209 Fedora/3.1.7-0.35.b3pre.fc14 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Ahrenholz, Jeffrey M" <jeffrey.m.ahrenholz@boeing.com>
References: <FD98F9C3CBABA74E89B5D4B5DE0263B9379A8486D1@XCH-NW-12V.nw.nos.bo eing.com> <4D626A88.6060806@htt-consult.com><FD98F9C3CBABA74E89B5D4B5DE0263B9379AA07740@XCH-NW-12V.nw.nos.boeing.com> <4D6298C6.50705@cs.hut.fi> <FD98F9C3CBABA74E89B5D4B5DE0263B9379AA077DE@XCH-NW-12V.nw.nos.boeing.com>
In-Reply-To: <FD98F9C3CBABA74E89B5D4B5DE0263B9379AA077DE@XCH-NW-12V.nw.nos.boeing.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "hipsec@ietf.org" <hipsec@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Hipsec] comments on draft-ietf-hip-rfc4423-bis-01
X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." <hipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hipsec>
List-Post: <mailto:hipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 17:41:04 -0000

On 02/21/2011 12:11 PM, Ahrenholz, Jeffrey M wrote:
>>>>> Section 6.2 last paragraph discusses skipping the address check;
>>>>> CBA can also be used to reduce handover latency here?
>>>> CBA?
>>> credit-based authentication
>>>
>>> Maybe this lost its steam? Was it ever implemented?
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-vogt-hip-credit-based-authorization-
>> 00
>>> I wouldn't reference CBA if there is no WG interest...
>> it's part of RFC5206.
> Aha, that's where CBA went. So, the last paragraph in 6.2 could be revised with something like:
>
> "A credit-based authorization approach [RFC5206] can be used between hosts for sending data prior to completing the address tests. Otherwise, if HIP is used between two hosts that fully trust each other, the hosts may optionally decide to skip the address tests. ..."

Check out what I changed.

v2.20.0 | Report a Bug | By Email