Re: [Pana] and network selection

On Mon, Nov 08, 2004 at 05:06:16PM -0500, Avi Lior wrote:
> One more thing to add to Jarri's comments:
> 
> One method maybe better than the other but both method can be used at the
> same time right? What can go wrong. What if they conflict.

I've read draft-adrangi-eap-network-discovery and I agree that 
they can conflict if EAP-based network selection is used for 
ISP selection instead of AAA intermediary selection.

> 
> Or do we say if one is used the other shouldn't be used.

I think so.  It is the responsibility of implementation 
to avoid such conflict.

Yoshihiro Ohba

> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jari Arkko [mailto:jari.arkko@piuha.net] 
> > Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 4:56 PM
> > To: Alper Yegin
> > Cc: 'Avi Lior'; 'Yoshihiro Ohba'; pana@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [Pana] and network selection
> > 
> > 
> > Alper Yegin wrote:
> > 
> > > PANA allows ISP discovery as early as PANA-Start-Request. 
> > Depending on 
> > > the deployment this message may be sent unsolicited, but it is 
> > > unicast.
> > >  
> > > I agree that the enabling discovery as early as possible (at the 
> > > lowest possible layer) is more optimal. When that's not possible 
> > > (e.g., lack of supporting technology) you need to keep popping up 
> > > layers to accomplish that. If using PANA, then you are 
> > done. If not, 
> > > then you can fall back to EAP-based discovery.
> > 
> > Yes. Two things remain, however:
> > 
> > (1) Does someone have an answer as to how all this can be
> >      accomplished in the current AAA protocols while
> >      still allowing the local access provider to have
> >      a proxy AND roaming? I'm not quite sure how the
> >      destination realm value is set in the case of
> >      Diameter EAP, for instance.
> > 
> > (2) We need to consider this in light of Avi's question,
> >      which was what additional value the PANA ISP selection
> >      provides over things that already exist in EAP. I
> >      personally do not believe you absolutely need to
> >      have additional value, but of course it would be
> >      useful if you could demonstrate, for instance, that
> >      your "L2" network selection scheme is better than
> >      what exists in 802.1X.
> > 
> >      Speaking of multicast packets, how does a PANA client
> >      know that it needs to initiate a PANA exchange? What
> >      if you added a new PANA multicast message that told
> >      the client about this and carries the ISP/ASP info
> >      within it?
> > 
> > --Jari
> > 

_______________________________________________
Pana mailing list
Pana@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pana