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

Vijay Devarapalli <vijayd@iprg.nokia.com> Fri, 08 October 2004 17:41 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 NAA14473 for <mip6-web-archive@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 13:41:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CFyu1-000447-3Y for mip6-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 08 Oct 2004 13:51:37 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CFycE-00050s-Tu; Fri, 08 Oct 2004 13:33:14 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CFyXj-00043R-Ez for mip6@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 08 Oct 2004 13:28:35 -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 NAA13315 for <mip6@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 13:28:34 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from darkstar.iprg.nokia.com ([205.226.5.69]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CFyhf-0003kv-53 for mip6@ietf.org; Fri, 08 Oct 2004 13:38:54 -0400
Received: (from root@localhost) by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com (8.11.0/8.11.0-DARKSTAR) id i98H0Su00499; Fri, 8 Oct 2004 10:00:28 -0700
X-mProtect: <200410081700> Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging Protection
Received: from UNKNOWN (10.241.88.113, claiming to be "[10.241.88.113]") by darkstar.iprg.nokia.com smtpdvY1Axd; Fri, 08 Oct 2004 10:00:27 PDT
Message-ID: <4166CE0B.8080204@iprg.nokia.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 10:27:39 -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: 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>
In-Reply-To: <697DAA22C5004B4596E033803A7CEF4403B1BF01@daebe007.americas.nokia.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 0ddefe323dd869ab027dbfff7eff0465
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: mip6@ietf.org
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: 3e15cc4fdc61d7bce84032741d11c8e5
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Yes to the concept of using a mobility option to authenticate
the BU.

but not the current drafts.

Vijay

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