RE: [Mipshop] final (?) list of MIPSHOP items for new charter

["Junghoon Jee" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Gabriel,
I am interested in the work of HMIP security.
I am willing to review it, provide feedback and read the drafts.

Regards,
Junghoon
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] 
> [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of gabriel montenegro
> Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 7:15 AM
> To: Soliman, Hesham; James Kempf; [e-mail]; 
> [e-mail]
> Subject: RE: [Mipshop] final (?) list of MIPSHOP items for new charter
> 
> 
> Hesham,
> 
> Oh, I see, that list. As you know, that was not a final list 
> and MN-MAP security was not the only item I dropped. 
> And the reason I dropped it was that I didn't get a sense 
> that a group of folks would be involved in that effort 
> (editing is required, but others also need to care about it, 
> review it, provide feedback, read the drafts, etc). Perhaps 
> they're out there, but I didn't get the sense that (besides 
> the authors) folks would be involved in the process. If 
> they're out there, speak out!
> 
> Perhaps you wish we make this an explicit commitment on the 
> part of WG members with respect to every one of the items on the list?
> We can certainly do that, but I won't unless folks really 
> find it would be useful (and express it!).
> 
> -gabriel
> 
> --- "Soliman, Hesham" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> > Hi James,
> > 
> > 
> >  > I registered an objection. My objection was that there was  > no 
> > discussion in  > MOBOPTS on security, as was done for FMIP. 
> Until such 
> > a  > discussion occurs, I  > cannot support moving HMIP to 
> MIPSHOP for 
> > standards-track discussion.
> > 
> > =>ok. We discussed this at length in private emails with Gab and I 
> > thought this was resolved. I don't want to repeat this 
> unless you want 
> > to resend those private emails to the list (I don't have a problem 
> > with it. So, if you and Gab are happy with sending them publicly go 
> > ahead.).
> > 
> > So, since this is a WG effort I'll just rely on the WG concensus 
> > process. If other reasons are raised or if other people 
> share James' 
> > concern let's discuss, but it seems like I failed to make 
> this clearer 
> > to James.
> > 
> > For the record, and the benefit of the WG, I reiterate that the 
> > security and Internet ADs had no problems with the security 
> approach 
> > in the draft.
> > 
> > Hesham
> > 
> >  > 
> >  >             jak
> >  >
> >  > ----- Original Message -----
> >  > From: "Soliman, Hesham" <[e-mail]>  > To: 
> > <[e-mail]>; <[e-mail]>  > Sent: 
> Tuesday, May 
> > 10, 2005 8:24 AM  > Subject: RE: [Mipshop] final (?) list 
> of MIPSHOP 
> > items for  > new charter  >  >  > Hi Gab,  >  >  > I tried 
> to have the 
> > smallest list of items for which I sensed some  >  > enthusiasm. We 
> > could ask for explicit commitment from folks, but  >  > 
> basically, for 
> > those items I felt the WG would have enough people  >  > to edit, 
> > review and comment. Frankly, I did not see much  > of a 
> group  >  > of 
> > folks who'd do that on the HMIP side of things. If I've got 
> the  >  > 
> > wrong impression, please speak up (I know about you Hesham).
> >  >
> >  > => I guess my surprise is because you put the original  
> > proposal 
> > and there was no objection to having the HMIP item.
> >  > People objected to lack of other items. People don't normally  > 
> > come out to support something that's already in the 
> charter, they  > 
> > complain about what's missing. So, I'm confused as to what you  > 
> > expected to see (and didn't) after you sent out the charter.
> >  > If you want to eliminate confusion maybe you should 
> explicitly  > 
> > ask for people's support of different items on the charter.
> >  > It's not clear how you made that decision.
> >  >
> >  > Hesham
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >  >
> >  >  > -gabriel
> >  >  >
> >  >  > --- "Soliman, Hesham" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >  >  > > Gab,
> >  >  > >
> >  >  > > I don't understand what happened to the HMIP doc you  > had 
> > initially.
> >  >  > > Why did this disappear?
> >  >  > >
> >  >  > > Hesham
> >  >  > >
> >  >  > >  > -----Original Message-----
> >  >  > >  > From: [e-mail]  >  > 
> > [mailto:[e-mail]]On
> >  >  > >  > Behalf Of gabriel montenegro  >  > >  > Sent: 
> Tuesday, May 
> > 10, 2005 4:49 AM  >  > >  > To: [e-mail]  >  > >  > 
> Subject: 
> > [Mipshop] final (?) list of MIPSHOP items for  >  > new 
> charter  >  > 
> > >  >  >  > >  >  >  > >  > Folks,  >  > >  >  >  > >  > 
> Based on the 
> > discussion, interest shown, etc, here's a  >  > >  > 
> reduced list of 
> > next  >  > >  > milestone items. Other items, of course, could be 
> > added once  >  > >  > progress on  >  > >  > this list has 
> been made.
> >  >  > >  >
> >  >  > >  > Further work on FMIPv6
> >  >  > >  > ----------------------
> >  >  > >  >
> >  >  > >  > - work on MN-AR security.
> >  >  > >  >
> >  >  > >  >    - AAA-based keys for handovers -
> >  >  > >  >
> >  >  > >  >    - derive key from SeND for fmip
> >  >  > >  >
> >  >  > >  > 2 documents
> >  >  > >  >
> >  >  > >  > - work on FMIPv6 itself:
> >  >  > >  >
> >  >  > >  > 1. common information elements for use by  >  > >  > 
> > 802.11, fmip6, fmip4  >  > >  > 2. local repair a la 
> FBU/FBAck/FNA  >  
> > > >  > 3. IP transport of those information elements  >  > 
> >  > from 
> > the AR  >  > >  > (PrRtXXX + CARD MN-AR ==> ICMPv6?)  >  > 
> >  >  >  > 
> > >  > potentially two docs:
> >  >  > >  >
> >  >  > >  > - info elements (#1 above)
> >  >  > >  > - "FMIPv6" (#2 and #3)
> >  >  > >  >
> >  >  > >  > 2 documents
> >  >  > >  >
> >  >  > >  > RR optimizations
> >  >  > >  > ----------------
> >  >  > >  >
> >  >  > >  > - merge of CGA-OMIP and CBA  >  > >  >  >  > >  > 1 
> > document  >  > >  >  >  > >  > Total:  5 documents  >  > >  
> >  >  > >  
> > > I believe this captures what the WG wants and can 
> reasonably  >  > >  
> > > do in the short term.
> >  >  > >  > Unless the list above is terribly broken, this 
> is what I'd  
> > >  > >  > like to present to the  >  > >  > AD's for approval.
> >  >  > >  >
> >  >  > >  > -gabriel
> >  >  > >  >
> >  >  > >  > _______________________________________________
> >  >  > >  > Mipshop mailing list
> >  >  > >  > [e-mail]
> >  >  > >  > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop
> >  >  > >  >
> >  >  > >
> >  >  > > ===========================================================
> >  >  > > This email may contain confidential and privileged  >  > 
> > material for the sole use  >  > >  of the intended recipient.  Any 
> > review or distribution by  >  > others is strictly  >  > >  
> > prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient please  >  > 
> > contact the sender  >  > >  and delete all copies.
> >  >  > > ===========================================================
> >  >  > >
> >  >  > >
> >  >  > > _______________________________________________
> >  >  > > Mipshop mailing list
> >  >  > > [e-mail]
> >  >  > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop
> >  >  > >
> >  >  >
> >  >
> >  > _______________________________________________
> >  > Mipshop mailing list
> >  > [e-mail]
> >  > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop
> >  >
> >  >
> >  >
> > 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mipshop mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop


_______________________________________________
Mipshop mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop