Re: [lp-wan] overview issue#2: AAA server term...

Hi,

I agree that the solution presented in draft-garcia-radext-radius-lorawan is specific to LoRaWAN. Not applicable to other radio technologies (i.e. Sigfox as mentioned). 

Although, the idea of having AAA and its advanced characteristics (e.g., Identity federation) is the general idea that can be extrapolated to LPWAN (That was also the idea behind the draft) 

I understand, at the end, that is the goal. Using AAA or LBES from what I understand is only nomenclature. Am I wright, or are there other reasons? If RADIUS or Diameter are not suitable for the task would be an interesting discussion, as well as analyzing the possible gap in case there are reasons to change the name, or the concept, beyond nomenclature. 

What do you think?

Thank you. 
Best Regards,
Dan. 

> El 18 may 2017, a las 18:01, Juan Carlos Zuniga <juancarlos.zuniga@sigfox.com> escribió:
> 
> Hi,
>  
> I tend to agree with Stephen in that assuming a RADIUS or Diameter server is not generic enough. Even though a solution like the one proposed in draft-garcia-radext-radius-lorawan might be suitable for certain technologies like LoRaWAN, there are other protocols like Sigfox which don’t have a joining procedure or an authentication message exchange (i.e. every message is individually authenticated). Therefore, Stephen’s proposal to use LBES instead of AAA sounds like a good generic solution.
>  
> Best,
>  
> Juan Carlos
>  
>  
> From: lp-wan [mailto:lp-wan-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Arun
> Sent: May 18, 2017 11:24 AM
> To: lp-wan@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [lp-wan] overview issue#2: AAA server term...
>  
> Hi Stephen, 
> There is a draft, draft-garcia-radext-radius-lorawan, that explains the use of AAA server in lpwa technologies like lora. 
> The idea is to use standardized solutions like AAA for authenticating end devices in such technologies.
> IMHO, AAA term in a way is good to push for the use of standard entities in the architecture. 
> 
> regards,
> Arun
> 
> On 18/05/2017 09:41, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>  
> Hiya,
>  
> (Crap: I mucked up the subject line by also calling this "issue#1"
> when I first sent this, maybe that's why nobody responded - so
> trying now with a correct subject line and with a suggested
> resolution in case nobody else cares... :-)
>  
> In [1] we define the term "AAA server." I don't think that's a good
> term to use, as it may be read to assume that we'll end up with a
> RADIUS or Diameter based solution and a typical AAA server like that
> is just not the same as a LoRaWAN NS/JS. (There might be a RADIUS or
> Diameter server behind such a beast, but it's not the same thing.)
> I think (less sure though) that the "AAA server" is also not so good
> for the other technologies too.
>  
> What'd the WG like to do here?
>  
> If nobody answers, in the next revision I'll use the term "LPWAN
> back-end server" ("LBES") instead of "AAA server." That's also not
> great but at least doesn't have the potential to create new confusion.
>  
> Cheers,
> S.
>  
> [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lpwan-overview-02#section-3 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lpwan-overview-02#section-3>
>  
>  
>  
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lp-wan mailing list
> lp-wan@ietf.org <mailto:lp-wan@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lp-wan <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lp-wan>
>  
> _______________________________________________
> lp-wan mailing list
> lp-wan@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lp-wan