Re: [Pana] Fwd: [IANA #454490] Last Call: <draft-ohba-pana-relay-03.txt> (Protocol for Carrying Authentication for Network Access (PANA) Relay Element) to Proposed Standard

[Yoshihiro Ohba <[e-mail]>]

I agree with Ralph's suggestion to rename "Req/Ans" to "R Message
Flag".   In that case, the value in the column shall be either '1' or
'0' (and no 'N/A').

Regards,
Yoshihiro Ohba


(2011/06/24 0:09), Ralph Droms wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 3:58 AM, Alper Yegin <[e-mail] 
> <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> 
>     __ __
> 
>     __ __
> 
>     I didn't understand why IANA assignment cares about the Req/Ans
>     bit. Is it really needed for IANA assignments?
> 
> 
> The Req/Ans column is needed to differentiate some of the messages, 
> e.g., PAR and PAN, which have different abbreviations but share the 
> same message code.
> 
>     ____
> 
>     __ __
> 
>     If we need to use it, one option is to put “not applicable for PCI
>     and PRY”.
> 
> 
> Reading RFC 5191 and the registry, I suggest that the Message Types 
> registry needs to be clarified a little, so that the column currently 
> labeled Req/Ans is tied directly to the 'R' Message Flag in the 
> Message Flags registry.  Giving the exact value for the 'R' flag in 
> that column seems more direct.  Perhaps rename "Req/Ans" to "R Message 
> Flag", with values in the column of '1', '0' or 'N/A' (the latter for 
> PCI and PRE messages; although PCI is a little tricky as its ABNF is 
> defined without "REQ" and I don't know if that ABNF implies the R 
> Message Flag MUST be 0 or if it's a "don't care").
> 
> - Ralph
> 
> 
> 
>     ____
> 
>     __ __
> 
>     And if that’s not acceptable/practical, then I’d say marking both
>     PCI and PRY with Req is OK. We could perceive them as requests
>     that do not expect answers. They are one-way messages. This is
>     more logical to me than to define an answer for which there is no
>     outstanding request.____
> 
>     __ __
> 
>     Alper____
> 
>     __ __
> 
>     __ __
> 
>     __ __
> 
>     __ __
> 
>     __ __
> 
>     __ __
> 
>     __ __
> 
>     __ __
> 
>     __ __
> 
>     __ __
> 
>      > -----Original Message-----
> 
>      > From: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>     [mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>] On
>     Behalf Of
> 
>      > Yoshihiro Ohba
> 
>      > Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2011 6:47 AM
> 
>      > To: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> 
>      > Subject: [Pana] Fwd: [IANA #454490] Last Call:
>     <draft-ohba-pana-relay-
> 
>      > 03.txt> (Protocol for Carrying Authentication for Network
>     Access (PANA)
> 
>      > Relay Element) to Proposed Standard
> 
>      >
> 
>      > We have received the following question from IANA.
> 
>      >
> 
>      > Since the 'R' (Request) bit is not set for PANA-Relay, I think it
> 
>      > should be filled with "Ans" (not "Req").
> 
>      >
> 
>      > BTW, I've found that PCI, for which the 'R' (Request) bit is
>     not set,
> 
>      > is filled with "Req" in the IANA registry.  I think this should
>     have
> 
>      > been filled with "Ans" as well.
> 
>      >
> 
>      > Any opinions?
> 
>      >
> 
>      > Yoshihiro Ohba
> 
>      >
> 
>      > -------- Original Message --------
> 
>      > Subject: [IANA #454490] Last Call: <draft-ohba-pana-relay-03.txt>
> 
>      > (Protocol for Carrying Authentication for Network Access (PANA)
>     Relay
> 
>      > Element) to Proposed Standard
> 
>      > Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2011 20:37:04 +0000
> 
>      > From: Amanda Baber via RT <[e-mail]
>     <mailto:[e-mail]>>
> 
>      > Reply-To: [e-mail]
>     <mailto:[e-mail]>
> 
>      > CC: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>,
>     [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>,
> 
>      > [e-mail]
>     <mailto:[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
>     <mailto:[e-mail]>,
> 
>      > [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>,
>     [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> 
>      >
> 
>      > IESG:
> 
>      >
> 
>      > IANA has reviewed draft-ohba-pana-relay-03.txt and has the
>     following
> 
>      > comments:
> 
>      >
> 
>      > IANA has questions about the IANA Actions in this document.
> 
>      >
> 
>      > IANA understands that, upon approval of this document, there
>     are two
> 
>      > IANA Actions that must be completed.
> 
>      >
> 
>      > First, in the Message Types registry in the Protocol for Carrying
> 
>      > Authentication for Network Access (PANA) Parameters registry
>     located
> 
>      > at:
> 
>      >
> 
>      > http://www.iana.org/assignments/pana-parameters/pana-parameters.xml
> 
>      >
> 
>      > a single, new message type will be added as follows:
> 
>      >
> 
>      > Value [ TBD ]
> 
>      > Name: PANA-Relay
> 
>      >
> 
>      > IANA QUESTION --> How should the following field in the registry be
> 
>      > filled in?
> 
>      > Req/Ans: [ ??? ]
> 
>      >
> 
>      > Abbrev: PRY
> 
>      > Reference: [ RFC-to-be ]
> 
>      >
> 
>      > IANA notes that the authors request the value "5" for the Value
>     of this
> 
>      > Message Type.
> 
>      >
> 
>      > Second, in the AVP Codes registry in the the Protocol for Carrying
> 
>      > Authentication for Network Access (PANA) Parameters registry
>     located
> 
>      > at:
> 
>      >
> 
>      > http://www.iana.org/assignments/pana-parameters/pana-parameters.xml
> 
>      >
> 
>      > two new AVP Codes will be added as follows:
> 
>      >
> 
>      > Code: [tbd2]
> 
>      > Attribute name: PaC-Information AVP
> 
>      > Reference: [ RFC-to-be ]
> 
>      >
> 
>      > Code: [tbd3]
> 
>      > Attribute name: Relayed-Message AVP
> 
>      > Reference: [ RFC-to-be ]
> 
>      >
> 
>      > IANA notes that the authors have requested codes "10" and "11" for
> 
>      > [tbd2] and [tbd3] respectively.
> 
>      >
> 
>      > IANA understands that these two actions are the only ones
>     required upon
> 
>      > approval of this document.
> 
>      >
> 
>      > Note:  The actions requested in this document will not be completed
> 
>      > until the document has been approved for publication as an RFC.
>     This
> 
>      > message is only to confirm what actions will be performed.
> 
>      >
> 
>      > Thanks,
> 
>      >
> 
>      > Amanda Baber
> 
>      > IANA
> 
>      >
> 
>      > On Wed May 25 13:37:06 2011, [e-mail]
>     <mailto:[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>      > >
> 
>      > > The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to
> 
>      > consider
> 
>      > > the following document:
> 
>      > > - 'Protocol for Carrying Authentication for Network Access (PANA)
> 
>      > Relay
> 
>      > >    Element'
> 
>      > > <draft-ohba-pana-relay-03.txt> as a Proposed Standard
> 
>      > >
> 
>      > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and
>     solicits
> 
>      > > final comments on this action. Please send substantive
>     comments to
> 
>      > the
> 
>      > > [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> mailing lists by
>     2011-06-22. Exceptionally, comments
> 
>      > may be
> 
>      > > sent to [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> instead. In
>     either case, please retain the
> 
>      > > beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
> 
>      > >
> 
>      > > Abstract
> 
>      > >
> 
>      > >
> 
>      > > This document specifies Protocol for carrying Authentication for
> 
>      > > Network Access (PANA) Relay Element functionality which
>     enables PANA
> 
>      > > messaging between a PANA Client (PaC) and a PANA
>     Authentication Agent
> 
>      > > (PAA) where the two nodes cannot reach each other by means of
>     regular
> 
>      > > IP routing.
> 
>      > >
> 
>      > >
> 
>      > >
> 
>      > > The file can be obtained via
> 
>      > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ohba-pana-relay/
> 
>      > >
> 
>      > > IESG discussion can be tracked via
> 
>      > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ohba-pana-relay/
> 
>      > >
> 
>      > >
> 
>      > > No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
> 
>      > >
> 
>      > >
> 
>      >
> 
>      >
> 
>      >
> 
>      >
> 
>      > _______________________________________________
> 
>      > Pana mailing list
> 
>      > [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> 
>      > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pana
> 
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     Pana mailing list
>     [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pana
> 
>