Re: [HOKEY] ERX-12 -- Please review changes

[Lakshminath Dondeti <[e-mail]>]

On 2/25/2008 7:26 PM, Yoshihiro Ohba wrote:
> Roundtrips between EAP peer and EAP authenticator on the access link
> are not major part of signaling latency compared to AAA roundtrips.  I
> have not heard a complaint on 802.11i 4-way handshake latency.

Consider that not to be the case any more.  I am complaining. :)  More 
seriously, handover latency of 10-20ms is a target in some networks.

If there is a sufficient budget for handover, we probably need to do 
nothing for reauthentication.

regards,
Lakshminath

> 
> Although it would be a nice thing to reduce any kind of roundtrips as
> much as possible, I am not sure, after reading the IETF Last Call
> comments, people outside the HOKEY WG seem to wonder if the expected
> benefit for more optimization with ERX pays to its deployment cost
> especially for existing lower-layers.  This is my main motivation to
> come up with EAP-KDE method.
> 
> Yoshihiro Ohba
> 
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 05:31:08PM -0800, Lakshminath Dondeti wrote:
>> Hi Bernard,
>>
>> I have reviewed draft-ohba-eap-kde-01 before and it does not meet fast 
>> reauthentication goals.  Please see below:
>>
>> On 2/25/2008 3:24 PM, Bernard Aboba wrote:
>>> [BA] I've recently seen a draft (from Yoshi, submitted today) that  seems
>>> to provide similar functionality with no changes to RFC 3748.  Although
>>> I haven't reviewed the document in depth, it did seem to provide
>>> method-independent re-authentication without multiple round-trips
>>> (at least for case of a local ERX server, which is the most important
>>> one from a performance point of view). 
>> The number of roundtrips on the access link is 3, if we take connection 
>> open or an equivalent into account.  With ERP, the peer can start 
>> sending authenticated data after 1 RT.
>>
>>> This document will probably be discussed in IEEE 802, which could adopt
>>> it as their approach to EAP re-authentication going forward.
>> In other access technologies, the handover latency requirements are more 
>> stringent and they have already adopted ERP and waiting for publication 
>> of the ERP RFC.  Without further optimizations, 802.11 with 3 RTs or 
>> more for connection setup and EAP-KDE and 2 more for the 4-way exchange 
>> has little to no hope of really achieving low handover latency.
>>
>> That model does not fit for voice call continuity.
>>
>> regards,
>> Lakshminath
>>
>>> If possible, it would be good to have a single standard for this, as opposed
>>> to multiple competing ones.
>> _______________________________________________
>> HOKEY mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hokey
>>
>>
> 
_______________________________________________
HOKEY mailing list
[e-mail]
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hokey