Re: [pcp] draft-chen-pcp-mobile-deployment-04
Alper Yegin <alper.yegin@yegin.org> Thu, 15 August 2013 20:46 UTC
Return-Path: <alper.yegin@yegin.org>
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 17E9F11E81B7 for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Aug 2013 13:46:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KKfYXiv0pkPd for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 15 Aug 2013 13:46:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.perfora.net (mout.perfora.net [74.208.4.194]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BA9011E81AF for <pcp@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Aug 2013 13:45:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.2.49] (88.247.135.202.static.ttnet.com.tr [88.247.135.202]) by mrelay.perfora.net (node=mrus3) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0Mhi8Z-1VWOdB0Ebb-00M61a; Thu, 15 Aug 2013 16:45:53 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Alper Yegin <alper.yegin@yegin.org>
In-Reply-To: <913383AAA69FF945B8F946018B75898A1902003F@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 23:45:51 +0300
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <241A5C64-7861-4501-A04E-DF3D99203E18@yegin.org>
References: <2E25F372-58FF-482F-9210-5526953A08D0@yegin.org> <913383AAA69FF945B8F946018B75898A1902003F@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
To: Tirumaleswar Reddy <tireddy@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283)
X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:10+m2XoBHXJYRP2+XCzByZJtKE7gMI2kbvzR0/q+XHY AzNmbGyNk7a5Q/RuSBYhtsK+6fbEYQgppnaIr0u3N4IftLjVDj MwXp3YVFgz5nHFZEiyHtle+yovrPCnNYLxCA9FgLcQnzE3ByBS 6bJAlq+osd5Cr1yuHxlw+kW2pw2FrYMxCsoyJaXV2M1WVVrbEK 8YslruetOrAK7XEhh81XCS635kXD6eUuiln0rl5ZM7bhHRj727 u/fYWeMIx9mrxR2XWnaS50XikqvbtxpGbOeTM2LlBb/7xyzB/N D45xClhCnzBR8MXU11A44VC1nTXF5EAiacwwYqRc8iy4g1voVx JLig89CIRHZ9ESijX23IeLRpbliWdPSgpUlHJtLnvIEi6ySOqz gfiCG5XJTmKDA==
Cc: "pcp@ietf.org" <pcp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [pcp] draft-chen-pcp-mobile-deployment-04
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, 15 Aug 2013 20:46:09 -0000
On Aug 15, 2013, at 7:08 PM, Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy) wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Alper Yegin [mailto:alper.yegin@yegin.org] >> Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 10:31 PM >> To: pcp@ietf.org >> Subject: [pcp] draft-chen-pcp-mobile-deployment-04 >> >> Hello, >> >> Regarding the authentication considerations.... Wouldn't a 3GPP network be a >> candidate to use PCP w/o authentication ? > > Can you provide more details why in 3GPP network PCP auth is not required ? > Both the PCP client and the PCP server are inside the 3GPP network which is secured at L2. Alper > --Tiru. > >> We could rely on lower-layer security as a substitute for PCP-layer security >> (much like what DHCP does). >> >> Alper >> >
- [pcp] draft-chen-pcp-mobile-deployment-04 Alper Yegin
- Re: [pcp] draft-chen-pcp-mobile-deployment-04 Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
- Re: [pcp] draft-chen-pcp-mobile-deployment-04 Alper Yegin
- Re: [pcp] draft-chen-pcp-mobile-deployment-04 Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)
- Re: [pcp] draft-chen-pcp-mobile-deployment-04 Cao,Zhen