Re: [Int-area] DCHP-based authentication for DSL?

["Julien Bournelle" <[e-mail]>]

Hi all,

 some years ago we proposed to add configuration data to the EAP protocol.
This proposal had been rejected and one argument was that EAP protocol
is an authentication protocol and not a configuration protocol and that the IETF
configuration protocol is DHCP. Now, I have the impression that this
the opposite,
some want to add authentication mechanism in the IETF configuration protocol
and I feel the argument is the same. As mentioned several time by alper, this
is clearly stated in a IAB's draft, section 2.5

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-iab-ip-config-00.txt

"Network access authentication is a distinct problem from Internet
   host configuration.  Network access authentication is best handled
   independently of the configuration mechanisms in use for the Internet
   and higher layers."

If people does not agree with the above statement, they should say so to IAB.

Based on that, my opinion is that the IETF should not support DHCP-based
authentication and should recommend use of PANA which has been defined
at the IETF for network access authentication.

Best Regards;

 Julien Bournelle

On 10/4/07, Jari Arkko <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> We talked about the DSL requirements earlier on this list. Now
> they have sent us a liaison statement regarding what they would
> like to do:
>
> "At this time, we would like to make the IETF aware that during
> our most recent DSL Forum quarterly meeting, the Architecture
> and Transport Working Group agreed to seriously consider adopting
> a mechanism such as that proposed in draft-pruss-dhcp-auth-dsl-01.txt
> or draft-zhao-dhc-user-authentication-02. We understand that the authors
> of these specifications intend to produce a combined document soon.
> The DSL Forum formally requests that the IETF adopt this as a work
> item, and would appreciate being advised of progress as soon as possible.
>
> Our next quarterly meeting is December 10-13, in Lisbon, Portugal."
>
>
> How do we feel about this? Is this a good idea, considering the DSL
> architecture? How will it affect DHCP the protocol? How would
> you go about making DHCP extensions so that they work best
> for all possible environments and not just DSL? Is anyone
> already working on the combined draft promised above? Are
> there any other choices that we should recommend instead?
>
> I would like to hold the discussion on this in this list until
> we've determined that the DHCP protocol is the right tool
> for the job. If it is, we can recharter DHC WG again to add
> the actual development work there. (DHC is right now
> being rechartered but that recharting is mostly a cleanup
> and not the addition of functionality to do this.)
>
> Jari
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
>


_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area