Re: [Mipshop] Re: AD review of draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key

Right, sorry, I did mean the Drafts Editor.

            jak

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Vijay Devarapalli" <vijay.devarapalli@azairenet.com>
To: "James Kempf" <kempf@docomolabs-usa.com>
Cc: "Jari Arkko" <jari.arkko@piuha.net>; "Mipshop" <mipshop@ietf.org>; 
<draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key@tools.ietf.org>
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 2:34 PM
Subject: Re: [Mipshop] Re: AD review of draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key

James Kempf wrote:
> Yes, that's fine.
>
> I'll have the revisions completed by Fri. Do you want me to resubmit
> through the RFC Editor in the usual way,

You mean the IETF secretariat. :)

> and bump the version number up?

Yes.

Vijay

>
>            jak
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jari Arkko" <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
> To: "James Kempf" <kempf@docomolabs-usa.com>
> Cc: <draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key@tools.ietf.org>; "Mipshop"
> <mipshop@ietf.org>
> Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 1:48 PM
> Subject: Re: AD review of draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key
>
>
> James,
>
>> jak>> If this is not clear from the current text, then perhaps you can
>> suggest a place where some additional text could be added to clarify?
>
> Ok, I was merely confused about this. Let me go read the text again,
> moment...
>
> OLD:
>     The mechanism utilizes SEND [SEND] and a public/private
>     key pair, generated on the MN using the same public key algorithm
>     as SEND, to encrypt/decrypt a shared handover key sent from the AR
>     to the MN.
> NEW:
>     The mechanism utilizes SEND [SEND] and an additional public/private
>     key pair, generated on the MN using the same public key algorithm
>     as SEND, to encrypt/decrypt a shared handover key sent from the AR
>     to the MN.
>
> OLD:
>    The message exchange between the MN and AR
>     to provision the handover key is required to be protected by SEND;
>     that is, the source address for the key provisioning messages must
>     be a CGA and the messages must be signed with the CGA private key.
>     This allows the AR to establish the MN's authorization to operate
>     on the CGA. The AR uses the CGA to name the handover key.
> NEW:
>    The message exchange between the MN and AR
>     to provision the handover key is required to be protected by SEND;
>     that is, the source address for the key provisioning messages must
>     be a CGA and the messages must be signed with the CGA private key.
>     This allows the AR to establish the MN's authorization to operate
>     on the CGA. The AR uses the CGA to name the handover key.
>     The SEND key pair is, however, independent from the handover
>     encryption/decryption key pair and the actual handover key.
>
> OLD:
>  The MN
>  generates a public/private key pair for encrypting/decrypting the
>  shared handover key, using the same public key algorithm as SEND.
> NEW:
>  First, the MN generates the necessary key pair and associated CGA
>  addresses so that the MN can employ SEND. Then the MN
>  generates a public/private key pair for encrypting/decrypting the
>  shared handover key, using the same public key algorithm as was
>  used for SEND.
>
> Finally, I noticed that the acronym CGA needs expansion in the
> the abstract.
>
> Is this enough for you to work for a new draft revision? How soon
> can you get it submitted?
>
> Jari
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mipshop mailing list
> Mipshop@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop

_______________________________________________
Mipshop mailing list
Mipshop@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop