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

Rajeev Koodli <rajeev@iprg.nokia.com> Tue, 12 October 2004 23:59 UTC

Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA29409 for <mip6-web-archive@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 19:59:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CHWj7-00073R-OU for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 20:10:45 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CHWWu-0007Hp-B2; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 19:58:08 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CHWVw-0006jm-08 for mip6@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 19:57:08 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA29281 for <mip6@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 19:57:07 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com ([205.226.5.69]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CHWgl-00070J-D5 for mip6@ietf.org; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 20:08:20 -0400
Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id i9CNTaK15945; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 16:29:36 -0700
X-mProtect: <200410122329> Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging Protection
Received: from rajeev.iprg.nokia.com (205.226.2.90) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com smtpdbeQ1Vb; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 16:29:34 PDT
Received: from iprg.nokia.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rajeev.iprg.nokia.com (8.9.3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA34634; Tue, 12 Oct 2004 16:57:51 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <416C6F7E.81EE95C5@iprg.nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 16:57:51 -0700
From: Rajeev Koodli <rajeev@iprg.nokia.com>
Organization: Nokia Research Center
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.4-RELEASE i386)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com
Subject: Re: [Mip6] Consensus Call: Standardizing the auth protocol [I-D:draft-ietf-mip6-auth-protocol-00.txt]
References: <697DAA22C5004B4596E033803A7CEF4403B1BF01@daebe007.americas.nokia.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 8b431ad66d60be2d47c7bfeb879db82c
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: mip6@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: rajeev@iprg.nokia.com
List-Id: mip6.ietf.org
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6>, <mailto:mip6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:mip6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mip6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6>, <mailto:mip6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: mip6-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: mip6-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 82c9bddb247d9ba4471160a9a865a5f3
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

YES, mainly because a deployed base of authentication
infrastructure exists, and potential for large-scale MIP6
deployment.

-Rajeev


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