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

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	[X]
   No	     	[ ]

Mika

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mip6-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mip6-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf Of
> ext Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com
> Sent: 07 October, 2004 01:03
> To: mip6@ietf.org
> Subject: [Mip6] Consensus Call: Standardizing the auth protocol
> [I-D:draft-ietf-mip6-auth-protocol-00.txt]
> 
> 
> 
> 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