Re: [pcp] PANA implementatinos to consider

"Dan Wing" <dwing@cisco.com> Thu, 13 September 2012 16:42 UTC

Return-Path: <dwing@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: pcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEF3021F8518 for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 09:42:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hqc6CBVjpsDo for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 09:42:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mtv-iport-2.cisco.com (mtv-iport-2.cisco.com [173.36.130.13]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0248D21F84F8 for <pcp@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 09:42:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2418; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1347554558; x=1348764158; h=from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date: message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=dooPwRyd7EYsQZV0vpvl7i3XcyvLbUu1uly7cZ3FpCg=; b=kntc5EDZMSPetew24xIN8/Rz7PSLigQKRpRL/F5ICTjne8RCu3MR4mFO +0w+4eNU6qmN4Ao/YQ11H//XZ1kLz5IB57ICW3cTnlOk9VEAvxNDkpc1o cfBoo5TyH3trmxBWTPCnS2LTM0cr42AIb1lHWge45GVgn0yJ72ixYtmmS c=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhoFAHYMUlCrRDoJ/2dsb2JhbABFrAaPcoEHgiABAQEDAQEBAQUKARUCEDQLBQcBAwIJDwIEAQEBJwcZDhUKCQgBAQQBEgsXh2UFDJs0oC0EixCGNwOIVYUPljSBaYMG
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,417,1344211200"; d="scan'208";a="58151662"
Received: from mtv-core-4.cisco.com ([171.68.58.9]) by mtv-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 13 Sep 2012 16:42:37 +0000
Received: from dwingWS ([10.32.240.196]) by mtv-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q8DGgbFF025243; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 16:42:37 GMT
From: Dan Wing <dwing@cisco.com>
To: 'Hannes Tschofenig' <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>, 'Sam Hartman' <hartmans@painless-security.com>
References: <20120913145755.6952gmx1@mx075.gmx.net> <1B150C40-51A4-4BD9-8915-2F9BC54B5BB9@gmx.net>
In-Reply-To: <1B150C40-51A4-4BD9-8915-2F9BC54B5BB9@gmx.net>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 09:42:37 -0700
Message-ID: <00e001cd91ce$c88ee1b0$59aca510$@com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: Ac2RxCQqjpHMIihbRZCJhUP1L3Ua3AACg+dA
Content-Language: en-us
Cc: pcp@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [pcp] PANA implementatinos to consider
X-BeenThere: pcp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: PCP wg discussion list <pcp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pcp>, <mailto:pcp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pcp>
List-Post: <mailto:pcp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pcp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcp>, <mailto:pcp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 16:42:39 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pcp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pcp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Hannes Tschofenig
> Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 8:26 AM
> To: Sam Hartman
> Cc: pcp@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [pcp] PANA implementatinos to consider
> 
> Hi Sam,
> 
> I wonder why you care about PCP at all. You are neither someone who
> ships operating systems nor someone who provides network equipment
> (like a NAT or a firewall).
>
> You seem to be willing to spend a lot of time on that topic and I am
> curious where this interest comes from.

Curiosity is fine, and it was nice of Sam to answer.  However, I hope
the IETF continues to welcome technical input, even if the person has
no "skin in the game" or cannot publicly explain their funding source.

-d

 
> Ciao
> Hannes
> 
> On Sep 13, 2012, at 5:57 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > hi.
> > So, as I mentioned  earlier I'm either in the camp of strongly
> > preferring PCP-specific authentication or in the camp of not caring
> much
> > at all.
> >
> > I'd kind of like to find out which camp I'm in by the 21st.
> >
> > My nervousness is about implementation complexity. I would like to
> see
> > PCP authentication be something that can easily be implemented with
> > open-source libraries. I know how to do that if we use an EAP library
> > directly. I've managed projects doing something quite similar and I
> > understand the implementation complexity.
> >
> > Would people familiar with PANA implementation be willing to suggest
> > which implementation I should look at? I'd prefer to look at one, but
> if
> > there's disagreement I'd be happy to look at two.
> > I'm sure you've done your analysis on this point but I'll feel more
> > comfortable if I do my own.
> >
> > I'll be happy to share my conclusions as I suspect that there are
> other
> > WG participants who care about implementation complexity.
> >
> > If there are open-source PCP servers I'd be happy to glance at those
> > just to see how things like memory management, event loop and state
> > management line up.
> >
> > --Sam
> > _______________________________________________
> > pcp mailing list
> > pcp@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcp
> 
> _______________________________________________
> pcp mailing list
> pcp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcp