IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: [HOKEY] Review of draft-gaonkar-radext-erp-attrs-02.txt

"Narayanan, Vidya" <vidyan@qualcomm.com> Fri, 11 January 2008 07:02 UTC

Return-path: <hokey-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDDu8-0005BH-Kb; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 02:02:12 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDDu8-0005BC-7d for hokey@ietf.org; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 02:02:12 -0500
Received: from wolverine02.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.251]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDDu6-0007Rd-Ah for hokey@ietf.org; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 02:02:12 -0500
DomainKey-Signature: s=qcdkim; d=qualcomm.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=X-IronPort-AV:Received:Received:Received:Received: X-MimeOLE:Content-class:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Subject:Date:Message-ID: In-Reply-To:X-MS-Has-Attach:X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic:Thread-Index:References:From:To:Cc: X-OriginalArrivalTime; b=p4AjCd32PSvt7bVNBp2JV2OPWewv2Y/IHiQStRq0zfZXitiXKCNfMLjd huuuWHdBoocWmEi8mKxjswd0no1O7SuA66z7HDwR4PGki4L7bR9bAenXE i/TfZXu1UhSFlu+/Z55wYVNwAnPEAKzylq0GpAZgGqILdgxy6EWbsXWWX s=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5100,188,5204"; a="474324"
Received: from numenor.qualcomm.com ([129.46.51.58]) by wolverine02.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 10 Jan 2008 23:02:09 -0800
Received: from msgtransport03.qualcomm.com (msgtransport03.qualcomm.com [129.46.61.154]) by numenor.qualcomm.com (8.14.1/8.12.5/1.0) with ESMTP id m0B728pO014516 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 10 Jan 2008 23:02:09 -0800
Received: from SANEXCAS02.na.qualcomm.com (sanexcas02.qualcomm.com [172.30.36.176]) by msgtransport03.qualcomm.com (8.14.1/8.14.2/1.0) with ESMTP id m0B727E1004027; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 23:02:08 -0800
Received: from NAEX13.na.qualcomm.com ([129.46.51.248]) by SANEXCAS02.na.qualcomm.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 10 Jan 2008 23:02:07 -0800
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [HOKEY] Review of draft-gaonkar-radext-erp-attrs-02.txt
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 23:01:24 -0800
Message-ID: <C24CB51D5AA800449982D9BCB9032513CF4999@NAEX13.na.qualcomm.com>
In-Reply-To: <47870DE9.7000505@deployingradius.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [HOKEY] Review of draft-gaonkar-radext-erp-attrs-02.txt
Thread-Index: AchUHFATLBhukI3yTSWxmfr1/8P+OAAAtHGw
References: <477D1029.2060502@deployingradius.com> <2069.69.12.173.8.1199475463.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <477ED21D.9010301@qualcomm.com> <1608.69.12.173.8.1199495480.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <C24CB51D5AA800449982D9BCB9032513C22802@NAEX13.na.qualcomm.com> <4062.69.12.173.8.1199655622.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <C24CB51D5AA800449982D9BCB9032513C22A67@NAEX13.na.qualcomm.com> <47843CFD.3040900@deployingradius.com> <C24CB51D5AA800449982D9BCB9032513CF47ED@NAEX13.na.qualcomm.com> <4785467D.1050607@deployingradius.com> <C24CB51D5AA800449982D9BCB9032513CF486 9@NAEX13.na. qualcomm.com> <7105.216.31.249.246.1199927549.squirrel@www.trepanning.net> <C24CB51D5AA800449982D9BCB9032513CF488D@NAEX13.na.qualcomm.com> <4785DEDC.7070707@deployingradius.com> <47867277.3040206@qualcomm.com> <4786FFA8.9010208@deployingradius.com> <C24CB51D5AA800449982D9BCB9032513CF4990@NAEX13.na.qualcomm.com> <478708BE.102080 5@deployingradius.com> <C24CB51D5AA800449982D9BCB9032513CF4991@NAEX13.na.qualcom! m.com> <47870DE9.7000505@deployingradius.com>
From: "Narayanan, Vidya" <vidyan@qualcomm.com>
To: Alan DeKok <aland@deployingradius.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Jan 2008 07:02:07.0384 (UTC) FILETIME=[E0E45980:01C8541F]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: c1c65599517f9ac32519d043c37c5336
Cc: hokey@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: hokey@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: HOKEY WG Mailing List <hokey.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hokey>, <mailto:hokey-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/hokey>
List-Post: <mailto:hokey@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hokey-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hokey>, <mailto:hokey-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: hokey-bounces@ietf.org

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alan DeKok [mailto:aland@deployingradius.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 10:34 PM
> To: Narayanan, Vidya
> Cc: Dondeti, Lakshminath; hokey@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [HOKEY] Review of draft-gaonkar-radext-erp-attrs-02.txt
> 
> Narayanan, Vidya wrote:
> > You are not serious that we should be basing our future 
> designs on how 
> > PAP works, are you?
> 
>   <sigh>  No.  I was trying to use analogy and reference.
> 
>   To repeat the discussion in short form:
> 
>  - DSRK's are necessary
>  * Why?
>  - to avoid exposing credentials across domains and proxies
>  * So?
>  - it would be catastrophic!
>  * No, it's accepted practice in many areas, and has zero problems
>  - you're proposing that we use PAP?
>  * Huh?
> 
>   All of the arguments for "security" of the 
> re-authentication keys are to protect against attacks that no 
> one cares about.  I referred to existing practices as proof 
> that those arguments were unfounded.  I did NOT propose that 
> we replace EAP with PAP, and it's fairly annoying that my 
> comments were read that way.
> 

I'm really confused.  If there are no security issues with PAP and if
exposing the actual credentials to all proxies is just fine, why would
we need EAP?  Why is PAP not good enough? 

I'm sorry that you find it annoying to have this discussion.  If it is
any consolation, I find it equally annoying that we would use PAP as an
analogy and say that exposing credentials are fine. 

Vidya

>   Alan DeKok.
> 

_______________________________________________
HOKEY mailing list
HOKEY@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hokey

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email