Re: [Mip6] WG LC: I-D draft-ietf-mip6-bootstrap-ps-01.txt (ProblemStatement for bootstrapping Mobile IPv6 )

Alpesh,

> > Q1. Should the network access service be always performed 
> > when a MN bootstraps ? 
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > Section 6.  Network Access and Mobility services [Page 14] 
> > Only having Mobile IPv6 service is not possible, since the 
> > Mobile IPv6 protocol requires ability to send and receive 
> > IPv6 packets.  
> > => It seems that network access service should be always performed.
> 
> If I understand your question correctly, the network access service should
> always be performed. Network access is required to send/receive packets.
> Now, whether access authentication/authorization is performed or not is
> another issue. Were you refering to this later case? 

This confisuion came from the use of 'network access provider.
As i said, i like James' recommendation of  using the concept of the 'service authorizer'.
With my understaning is correct, 
In the Mobility service subscription scenario, both the network access service and the mobility service are required.
Howerver, only the mobility service authorizer does exist without network access service authorizer.
If you accept the use of James' comments, i have no more issue related with this.

> > 
> > Section 7.1  Mobility Service Subscription Scenario => There 
> > is no words about network access service.
> 
> The last paragraph mentions this. What specific details were you looking
> for?
> 
This question is in line with the first question.
What about changing this section with little modification by changing MSP to mobility service authorizer ?

7.1  Mobility Service Subscription Scenario

   Many commercial deployments are based on the assumption that mobile
   nodes have a subscription with a mobility service authorizer.  In particular, in
   this scenario the MN has a subscription with an mobility service authorizer, called the home
   service authorizer, for Mobile IPv6 service.  As stated in Section 6, the mobility service authorizer is
   responsible of setting up a home agent on a subnet that acts as a
   Mobile IPv6 home link.  As a consequence, the home mobility service authorizer should
   explicitly authorize and control the whole bootstrapping procedure.

   Since the MN is assumed to have a pre-established trust relationship
   with its home provider, it must be configured with an identity and
   credentials, for instance an NAI and a shared secret by some
   out-of-band means before bootstrapping, for example by manual
   configuration.

   In order to guarantee ubiquitous service, the MN should be able to
   bootstrap MIPv6 operations with its home mobility service authorizer from any possible access
   location, such as an open network or a network managed by an ASP,
   that may be different from the mobility service authorizer and may not have any
   pre-established trust relationship with it.

> > Q2. Does we have to consider the case of  infrastructure-less 
> > scenario when we develop a bootstrapping solution or not ?
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > Section 7.4 Infrastructure-less scenario [Page 17] This 
> > specific scenario is not supported in this document.  The 
> > reason for this is described in Section 9.
> > Section 9. Security Considerations
> > Thus, the case of infrastructure-less network where there is 
> > absolutely no pre-mediated trust is kept outside of scope of 
> > this document.
> > => It seems that we don't need to consider the 
> > infrastructure-less scenario 
> >      when we create a bootstrapping solution.
> 
> This is explicitly left outside the scope.

In my understanding,
Infrastructure-less network means that there is no service authorizer.
If it's right, yes it is outside the scope of bootstrapping.

> > Q3. Does a bootstrapping solution should support local home 
> > agent assignment or not ?
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > Section 5.1.2  Dynamic Home Agent Assignment [Page 10] Local 
> > home agents
> >       The mobile node's home ASP may want to allow a local roaming
> >       partner ASP to assign a local home agent for the mobile node.
> >       This is useful both from the point of view of communications
> >       efficiency, and has also been mentioned as one approach 
> > to support
> >       location privacy.
> > => What is the exact meaning of the 'useful' and 'also been 
> > mentioned' ?
> >      Is the local home agent function optional[MAY] ?
> 
> So, this is an ancillary need. It is definitely not must from this draft.

Yes, i understand your opinion.
I think we need to clearly decide that,
it can be included in requirement items or not.

--Junghoon

> -a
> 
> > 
> > draft-le-aaa-mipv6-requirements-03.txt
> > Section 5.5.  Home agent allocation
> >    Such functionality SHOULD also be considered when designing the AAA
> >    support for MIPv6 solution.
> > => It seems that we SHOULD support the local HA assignment function.
> > I already know that draft-ietf-mip6-bootstrap-ps is not a I-D 
> > that describe the requirement & 
> > draft-le-aaa-mipv6-requirements was expired. 
> > But i think that we have to decide about this because many 
> > different approaches can be come out depending on our decision.
> > 
> > --Junghoon
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Gopal Dommety" <gdommety@cisco.com>
> > To: <mip6@ietf.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 5:11 AM
> > Subject: [Mip6] WG LC: I-D 
> > draft-ietf-mip6-bootstrap-ps-01.txt (Problem Statement for 
> > bootstrapping Mobile IPv6 )
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > Hello All,
> > > 
> > > 
> > > This is a Working Group Last Call for the following I-D:
> > > draft-ietf-mip6-bootstrap-ps-01.txt
> > > Title:
> > > Problem Statement for bootstrapping Mobile IPv6
> > > 
> > > Please note that the status intended for this I-D is 
> > Proposed Standard.
> > > 
> > > Please review and post your comments by March 3rd, 2005.
> > > 
> > > -Chairs,
> > > 
> > > URL-ID is:
> > > 
> > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mip6-bootstrap-
> > ps-01.txt
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Mip6 mailing list
> > > Mip6@ietf.org
> > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6
> >