IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [pcp] Comparison of PCP authentication

Sam Hartman <hartmans@painless-security.com> Fri, 17 August 2012 13:16 UTC

Return-Path: <hartmans@painless-security.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 54CC921F859B for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 06:16:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 4.216
X-Spam-Level: ****
X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.216 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.072, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1]
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 TH788Bg8Ims7 for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 06:16:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ec2-23-21-227-93.compute-1.amazonaws.com (ec2-23-21-227-93.compute-1.amazonaws.com [23.21.227.93]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E377A21F8517 for <pcp@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 06:16:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from carter-zimmerman.suchdamage.org (c-98-217-126-210.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [98.217.126.210]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "laptop", Issuer "laptop" (not verified)) by mail.suchdamage.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E3131209D1; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 09:07:56 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by carter-zimmerman.suchdamage.org (Postfix, from userid 8042) id EA6BE4350; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 09:07:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: Sam Hartman <hartmans@painless-security.com>
To: Alper Yegin <alper.yegin@yegin.org>
References: <9B57C850BB53634CACEC56EF4853FF653B6EC381@TK5EX14MBXW604.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com> <067d01cd73fd$765a6c50$630f44f0$@com> <D6D2DEED-C35A-45AB-8B72-96195C308DB9@yegin.org> <57FF0F8E-1B86-410F-8B6B-C4893A28222F@lilacglade.org> <BB72B80F-0622-4A5B-A985-79D8AED13E0B@apple.com> <003b01cd7587$a111b760$e3352620$@com> <15990E87-2D59-49B1-845C-2A4CB5A1FBD6@lilacglade.org> <008801cd758f$3fd306e0$bf7914a0$@com> <C72CBD9FE3CA604887B1B3F1D145D05E2CE65225@szxeml528-mbx.china.huawei.com> <028801cd75d6$c5765490$5062fdb0$@com> <tsla9y4gptp.fsf@mit.edu> <04c901cd7658$37a740c0$a6f5c240$@com> <tslboikexlv.fsf@mit.edu> <054001cd765d$54c0f3e0$fe42dba0$@com> <0F259BA1-CEFF-4346-AFE5-3D33BB0CF0CC@lilacglade.org> <C72CBD9FE3CA604887B1B3F1D145D05E2CE756EE@szxeml528-mbs.china.huawei.com> <502C6BF0.3030400@toshiba.co.jp> <6F0B4ED8-68F1-44BB-A94B-E5D86E6C7254@lilacglade.org> <502CEB6D.6040304@toshiba.co.jp> <684F11AE-1361-4A75-A70B-8B0226510E09@gmail.com> <63E0C6E0-8E5B-4AAA-B0C8-D2E892ECEE18@yegin.org>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 09:07:47 -0400
In-Reply-To: <63E0C6E0-8E5B-4AAA-B0C8-D2E892ECEE18@yegin.org> (Alper Yegin's message of "Fri, 17 Aug 2012 11:14:59 +0300")
Message-ID: <tsl393l3bvg.fsf@mit.edu>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110009 (No Gnus v0.9) Emacs/22.3 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cc: pcp@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [pcp] Comparison of PCP authentication
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: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 13:16:03 -0000

    Alper> EAP Authenticator is on the PCP server.  Hence, PAA (PANA
    Alper> Authentication Agent) and PCP server are on the same node.
    Alper> Therefore, the PAA can tell whether it's authenticating the
    Alper> PaC for PCP or for network access by looking at the
    Alper> destination port.  That's sufficient.

So you are happy to decide PCP authentication doesn't need a PANA relay?
If so, I propose we explicitly decide that.

It makes my channel binding question easier.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email