[MEXT] mext-cga-01

"Alper Yegin" <alper.yegin@yegin.org> Sat, 12 February 2011 09:17 UTC

Return-Path: <alper.yegin@yegin.org>
X-Original-To: mext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78F583A6A70 for <mext@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Feb 2011 01:17:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.149
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.149 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MSGID_MULTIPLE_AT=1.449, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 XphyyMs3-6Yj for <mext@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 12 Feb 2011 01:17:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mout.perfora.net (mout.perfora.net [74.208.4.195]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F5203A691E for <mext@ietf.org>; Sat, 12 Feb 2011 01:17:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ibm (dsl88-247-34762.ttnet.net.tr [88.247.135.202]) by mrelay.perfora.net (node=mrus1) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0Lb441-1QYqB41gXB-00kMfZ; Sat, 12 Feb 2011 04:18:04 -0500
From: "Alper Yegin" <alper.yegin@yegin.org>
To: <julienl@qualcomm.com>, <mext@ietf.org>
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2011 11:17:59 +0200
Message-ID: <14fc01cbca95$c1fd9370$45f8ba50$@yegin@yegin.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_14FD_01CBCAA6.85866370"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AcvKlbYpTSAY67aUS3Gy33tPKL0w4w==
Content-Language: en-us
x-cr-hashedpuzzle: AkI7 C2cb Eza5 FPne FQlf Humb JdMd J+4t K3LD Okha QeQv UOYB VA07 V3bJ WAVi WGys; 2; agB1AGwAaQBlAG4AbABAAHEAdQBhAGwAYwBvAG0AbQAuAGMAbwBtADsAbQBlAHgAdABAAGkAZQB0AGYALgBvAHIAZwA=; Sosha1_v1; 7; {CEDF1DC2-1DDB-45B1-BC52-44557AC27068}; YQBsAHAAZQByAC4AeQBlAGcAaQBuAEAAeQBlAGcAaQBuAC4AbwByAGcA; Sat, 12 Feb 2011 09:17:46 GMT; bQBlAHgAdAAtAGMAZwBhAC0AMAAxAA==
x-cr-puzzleid: {CEDF1DC2-1DDB-45B1-BC52-44557AC27068}
X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:YCkjViCVRlQWvRL++EmoPZigV7t3VQJwIBtu8AQRLPd mPl3K26x4RM8hCzx6sCFao6mI0LWt0X4qSp/pt1VpDf9I5HHj2 MMnZ3PTJrSO8hzTTwKgtuIFTpsPlHtDMT3f4sFIBDOh0ldXfsV jHcM2xMBMJIYhy9DOCJ2G2seC+81a/XMxIlhnaPRs1UYkMOzg9 g+xpt+ZlzCr2MQg8Hz1uRinchmgnl4lhIdINdApjTI=
Subject: [MEXT] mext-cga-01
X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG <mext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext>
List-Post: <mailto:mext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2011 09:17:51 -0000

Hello Julien, and MEXT members,

 

 

I can have a MN that simply generates a CGA-based HoA by knowing the prefix
served by the HA implementing this I-D, and get its BU accepted. 

The HA has no way to know whether this MN is authorized to be served
(irrespective of the choice of HoA) or not.

 

So, although I see this I-D serves a purpose by ensuring HoA ownership, I
don't see how it achieves general "BU authorization".

 

Probably this solution's applicability shall reflect that, or some
complimentary technique needs to be identified in order to complete the
picture.

 

Alper