Re: [Mip6] Consensus Call: Standardizing the auth protocol [I-D: draft-ietf-mip6-auth-protocol-00.txt]

I vote NO.

-Brian

Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com wrote:
> This is a consensus call to the WG on the issue of standardizing the
> authentication-data-suboption mechanism for performing a binding between the
> MN and HA. The issue has been discussed on the WG mailing list over
> the last few weeks. The I-D
> (draft-patil-mip6-whyauthdataoption-00.txt) has captured some of the
> arguments, but there are several others that have been made on the
> list as well. A summary of the discussion was sent out earlier and is
> captured in :
> http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mip6/current/msg01690.html
> 
> The proposal here (in brief) is to standardize a mechanism specified
> in I-D draft-ietf-mip6-auth-protocol-00.txt for performing MIP6
> registration with a home agent. RFC3775 specifies the use of IPsec to
> secure the binding update/ACK messages between the MN and HA. The
> auth-protocol mechanism relies on the use of an
> authentication-data-suboption and does not require the MN-HA to
> establish an IPsec SA.  
> (For the discussion that has ensued so far, please refer to the MIP6
> ML archives)
> 
> The question to the WG is:
> 
> 1. Should we standardize the authentication protocol specified in I-D
>    draft-ietf-mip6-auth-protocol-00.txt as an alternative (to the
>    IPSec mechanism specified in RFC3775/6) means to securing the BUs
>    and BAcks between the MN and HA. Note that this solution is an
>    additional mechanism for doing registration with an HA and does not
>    deprecate the currently specified solution. 
> 
>    Yes	     [ ]
>    No	     [ ]
> 
> 
> The consensus call will close on October 12th, 2004.
> 
> -Chairs
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mip6 mailing list
> Mip6@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6
> 

_______________________________________________
Mip6 mailing list
Mip6@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6