RE: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG adoption ofinternetdrafts

["Narayanan, Vidya" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Junghoon,
As Julien, Lakshminath and I pointed out, the issue Sam has is with
using an EAP-derived AMSK for application keying. The AAA-based key
derivation itself is well-aligned with RFC4004 and there is no issue
with this. We will be removing the appendix on HMK derivation - it was
always planned to be a separate I-D and that needs to wait until the
AMSK dust settles down. 

Thanks,
Vidya 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Julien Bournelle [mailto:[e-mail]] 
> Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 4:47 AM
> To: Junghoon Jee
> Cc: Narayanan, Vidya; 'Yoshihiro Ohba'; Dondeti, Lakshminath; 
> [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG 
> adoption ofinternetdrafts
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2006 at 04:55:37PM +0900, Junghoon Jee wrote:
> > Hi Vidya and Yoshihiro,
> > 
> > > If more people actually think there is an issue here, I'd 
> be happy 
> > > to run it by Sam and Russ. However, I strongly believe that this 
> > > step is not required at this time, since we have precedence with 
> > > approved standards track documents along very similar lines.
> > 
> > I have the same issue with Yoshihiro from my attendance to 
> the HOAKEY 
> > BoF.
> > I also feel the need for getting Sam's opinion here.
> 
>  I'd like to get the exact issue on this document. Is it the 
> HMK  derivation based on AMSK (describe in appendix and not 
> require) or the  mechanism based on AAA to get the shared key 
> between MN and AR ?
> 
>  thanks,
> 
>  Julien B.
> 
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > -Junghoon
> > 
> > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > Vidya
> > > 
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Yoshihiro Ohba [mailto:[e-mail]]
> > > > Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 6:22 PM
> > > > To: Dondeti, Lakshminath
> > > > Cc: [e-mail]
> > > > Subject: Re: [Mipshop] Gauging interest in official WG 
> adoption of
> > 
> > > > internetdrafts
> > > > 
> > > > As far as I understand, Sam's concern is not only on 
> application 
> > > > keying using AMSK but also AAA-assisted application keying
> > > in general.
> > > > So I am not sure if your suggested remedy really addresses the 
> > > > concern.  I'd suggest asking Sam's opinon before moving forward.
> > > > 
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Yoshihiro Ohba
> > > > 
> > > > On Sat, Mar 25, 2006 at 05:36:46PM -0800, Lakshminath Dondeti
> > wrote:
> > > > > Disclaimer: I work with one of the authors (Vidya) of the 
> > > > > handover-keys-aaa I-D, although didn't contribute to the
> > > > draft in anyway.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I just read the parts of the I-D that seem to be
> > > > contentious and note
> > > > > that the reference to AMSKs is merely an example and the
> > > HMK can be
> > > > > established through other means, say by preprovisioning.
> > > > > 
> > > > > That said, I think it is best to remove Appendix A (I am not
> > sure
> > > > > about A.1, that probably should stay and resolved 
> later) as it 
> > > > > reproduces a key hierarchy and key derivation process
> > > that is still
> > > > > under active discussion.
> > > > > 
> > > > > regards,
> > > > > Lakshminath
> > > > > 
> > > > > At 04:25 PM 3/25/2006, Yoshihiro Ohba wrote:
> > > > > >I have a reservation on
> > > > draft-vidya-mipshop-handover-keys-aaa-01.txt.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >The draft describes a AAA-assisted key management 
> protocol to 
> > > > > >generate handover keys for protecting signaling between MN
> > > > and AR.  I
> > > > > >am viewing the proposal as an application keying for 
> FMIPv6 and
> > 
> > > > > >possibly other protocols.  However, in the IETF65 hoakey
> > > BOF, Sam
> > > > > >Hartman, a Security AD, raised concern on application
> > > > keying.  As a
> > > > > >consequence, the hoakey BOF chairs made a decision 
> to exclude 
> > > > > >application keying from the BOF charter, expecting
> > > > application keying
> > > > > >to be discussed in a separate BOF.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Thus, it might be wiser to hold this draft until there
> > > is a clear
> > > > > >consensus on how to deal with application keying in the IETF.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Best regards,
> > > > > >Yoshihiro Ohba
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >On Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 11:49:36PM -0800, gabriel
> > > montenegro wrote:
> > > > > >> Folks,
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> In today's meeting we talked about 4 potential items up for
> > > > > >adoption as official working
> > > > > >> groups. Talking with folks after the meeting, we've decided
> > to
> > > > > >add two more to the list
> > > > > >> of items we'll ask the WG whether we should adopt. This is
> > the
> > > > > >follow-up email to today's
> > > > > >> discussion, to make sure we ask this on the mailing list.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> So the question to the WG is: Should we adopt the following
> > > > > >documents as official WG
> > > > > >> items (based on the individual drafts as noted below)?:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> 1. draft-ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-rev-XX.txt
> > > > > >> based on draft-koodli-mipshop-rfc4068bis-00.txt
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> 2. draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-keys-aaa-XX.txt
> > > > > >> based on  draft-vidya-mipshop-handover-keys-aaa-01.txt
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> 3. draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key-send-XX.txt
> > > > > >> based on draft-kempf-mobopts-handover-key-01.txt (currently
> > > > > >> expired)
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> 4. draft-ietf-mipshop-fh80216e-XX.txt
> > > > > >> based on draft-jang-mipshop-fh80216e-02.txt
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> 5. draft-ietf-mipshop-3gfh-XX.txt based on 
> > > > > >> draft-yokota-mipshop-3gfh-02.txt
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> 6. draft-ietf-mipshop-cga-cba-XX.txt based on 
> > > > > >> draft-arkko-mipshop-cga-cba-03.txt
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Please send comments one way or another through April 4,
> > 2006.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Thanks,
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> chairs
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> __________________________________________________
> > > > > >> Do You Yahoo!?
> > > > > >> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > > protection around
> > > > > >> http://mail.yahoo.com
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > > > >> 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
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mipshop mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop
> 
> --
> julien.bournelle at int-evry.fr
> 

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