Re: [Mip4] Does MIP support RegReq authentication without having to do timekeeping?

Yep. I think what Kent said makes sense.
MR will use the timestamp returned in the RRP with code 133 and the second RRQ should work just fine. 

I guess no need to change anything then :-)

Best Regards,
Ahmad

-----Original Message-----
From: Kent Leung (kleung) [mailto:kleung@cisco.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2013 2:32 PM
To: Alexandru Petrescu
Cc: Ahmad Muhanna; Mobile IPv4 Mailing List
Subject: RE: [Mip4] Does MIP support RegReq authentication without having to do timekeeping?

I assumed that you had an MR that could do that. I'm not aware of any MR vendor that will maintain the timestamp state after recovering from a failure. 

On your original issue, wouldn't the re-registration succeed after the HA replies with code 133? It would take two registration messages from MR so it takes a little longer.

Kent

-----Original Message-----
From: Alexandru Petrescu [mailto:alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2013 12:24 PM
To: Kent Leung (kleung)
Cc: Ahmad Muhanna; Mobile IPv4 Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Mip4] Does MIP support RegReq authentication without having to do timekeeping?

Le 14/03/2013 20:20, Kent Leung (kleung) a écrit :
> Hi Alex. The nonce method is specified in the Mobile IP RFCs. But I'm 
> not sure if any vendor supports that. If #2 works, that should address 
> you issue.

This is something we should implement on the MR side.  Do you think the HA side already does it (I doubt?)?

Alex

>
> Kent
>
> -----Original Message----- From: mip4-bounces@ietf.org 
> [mailto:mip4-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alexandru Petrescu Sent:
>  Thursday, March 14, 2013 11:54 AM To: Ahmad Muhanna Cc: Mobile IPv4 
> Mailing List Subject: Re: [Mip4] Does MIP support RegReq 
> authentication without having to do timekeeping?
>
> Sounds reasonable to use timestamp as usual and if it fails then try 
> the nonce... but...
>
> Does this behaviour require modification of the HA? (we are not able 
> to modify it, but we can modify the MR).
>
> Le 14/03/2013 19:44, Ahmad Muhanna a écrit :
>> Hi Alex,
>>
>> As far as I recall, RFC2002 and all updates afterwards, allow the use 
>> of nonce. Basically like a challenge.
>>
>>> From implementation prospective; I would allow both to coexist as
>>> follows:
>> 1. Both HA and MR uses timestamp as normal and no issue there.
>
> Yes.
>
>> 2. When the MR fails or start NOT to have a valid time, the MR should 
>> have remembered the last RRP ID which is based on timestamp  and use 
>> that for Re-Registration.
>
> Ok, this could be done.
>
>> 3. At the HA, it should check timestamp first, if it passes then 
>> timestamp continues to work; if it fails, the HA should check the 
>> Re-Registration ID against the last ID that was sent in the last RRP, 
>> if it is the same, the HA should allow the RRP to go through.
>
> This is a modification to the HA implementation, isn't it?
>
> Alex
>
>>
>> I Hope this helps!
>>
>> Cheers!
>>
>> Best Regards, Ahmad
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: mip4-bounces@ietf.org 
>> [mailto:mip4-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Alexandru Petrescu
>> Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2013 12:21 PM To: Mobile IPv4 Mailing List
>> Subject: [Mip4] Does MIP support RegReq authentication without having 
>> to do timekeeping?
>>
>> MIP4 participants,
>>
>> I would like to learn whether Mobile IPv4 spec supports an 
>> authentication scheme for RegReq/RegRep which does not rely on 
>> timekeeping.
>>
>> Let me explain why.
>>
>> We use a Mobile Router in a moving network that gets connected to the 
>> Home Agent.  The Mobile Router's power supply may be turned off (its 
>> battery dies out after an extended period of inactivity, like in a 
>> vehicle).  At that point the MR looses its time.
>>
>> When it finally wakes up, it has to perform a Registration Req/Rep 
>> with the HA, without assuming that its time is correct.  Or, the
>> MIP4 regreq/regrep HA implementation that we use seems to rely on 
>> having the right time, otherwise the registration fails.
>>
>> Under these conditions, is it possible to use an auth mechanism which 
>> does not rely on timekeeping?
>>
>> Alex
>>
>> -- Mip4 mailing list: Mip4@ietf.org Web interface:
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip4 Charter page:
>> http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mip4-charter.html Supplemental
>> site: http://www.mip4.org/
>>
>>
>
>
> -- Mip4 mailing list: Mip4@ietf.org Web interface:
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip4 Charter page:
> http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mip4-charter.html Supplemental
> site: http://www.mip4.org/
>
>