Re: [Mip6] Next steps for I-D: draft-ietf-mip6-auth-protocol

Vijay Devarapalli <vijayd@iprg.nokia.com> Fri, 22 October 2004 01:20 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 VAA21393 for <mip6-web-archive@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 21:20:00 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CKoIq-0000Dn-BN for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 21:33:12 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CKlUC-0004TH-W0; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 18:32:45 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CKkLZ-000847-4s for mip6@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 17:19:45 -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 RAA00492 for <mip6@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 17:19:42 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com ([205.226.5.69]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CKkYG-0001lg-0r for mip6@ietf.org; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 17:32:52 -0400
Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id i9LKpr432159; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 13:51:53 -0700
X-mProtect: <200410212051> Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging Protection
Received: from mvdhcp14195.americas.nokia.com (172.18.141.95, claiming to be "[172.18.141.95]") by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com smtpdvNiX3L; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 13:51:52 PDT
Message-ID: <417827C4.9000607@iprg.nokia.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 14:19:00 -0700
From: Vijay Devarapalli <vijayd@iprg.nokia.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Alpesh <alpesh@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [Mip6] Next steps for I-D: draft-ietf-mip6-auth-protocol
References: <697DAA22C5004B4596E033803A7CEF4403B1C009@daebe007.americas.nokia.com> <41780AA4.4010405@iprg.nokia.com> <41781014.9060904@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <41781014.9060904@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: bdc523f9a54890b8a30dd6fd53d5d024
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: mip6@ietf.org, Charlie P <charliep@iprg.nokia.com>, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com
X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
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: 3002fc2e661cd7f114cb6bae92fe88f1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Alpesh wrote:

> Charlie -
> 
> I just did a grep on doc and we don't have a MUST that NAI and 
> MHAE/MN-AAA AE
> must go together. NAI "should" be used with the auth. option (not must).

"should" is not defined in RFC 2119. :) when used in an RFC,
the lowercase should is generally considered the equivalent
of MUST. alteast thats my understanding.

I guess you wanted to say NAI option SHOULD be used with auth
option (?).

Vijay

> 
> Beyond that, can you list the issues? I can add them up on the issue 
> tracker
> (or maybe you can too) and we can track it there?
> 
> -a
> 
> Charlie P wrote:
> 
>>
>> Hello Basvaraj,
>>
>> I am in favor of getting things done as quickly as possible,
>> but I hope that we do not have to rush to completion so
>> soon on this.  What are the driving factors for expediting
>> the standardization of the protocol?
>>
>> For instance, I strongly disagree that authentication
>> should mandate including the NAI.  I also wonder
>> why there is any mandate to agree with anything
>> in rfc3012bis, since that is a protocol specification
>> concerned with IPv4.
>>
>> I think there could be a number of other issues
>> about which discussion is needed.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Charlie P.
>>
>>
>>
>> Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com wrote:
>>
>>> Next steps for I-D: draft-ietf-mip6-auth-protocol
>>>
>>> 1. Merge the NAI Option for MIP6 (specified in I-D:
>>>   draft-ietf-mip6-nai-option) with the Auth protocol draft.   2. 
>>> There were several people who suggested during the consensus call
>>>   that they would like to see some changes to the current
>>>   proposal. Please send the changes that you would like to see to the
>>>   I-D by raising an issue. The issue list for MIP6 is at:
>>>   http://www.mip4.org/issues/tracker/mip6/
>>>
>>> 3. We will issue a Working group last call as soon as the next
>>>   revision of the I-D is published.
>>>
>>> -Basavaraj
>>>   _______________________________________________
>>> 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


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