IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [pcp] Side-by-side or nested protocols (was Re: PANA implementatinos to consider)

Yoshihiro Ohba <yoshihiro.ohba@toshiba.co.jp> Tue, 18 September 2012 15:21 UTC

Return-Path: <yoshihiro.ohba@toshiba.co.jp>
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 1730D21E80DB for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 08:21:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.291
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.291 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.202, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001]
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 Ba4N1xrNR+Ry for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 08:21:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imx2.toshiba.co.jp (inet-tsb5.toshiba.co.jp [202.33.96.24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A512621F866E for <pcp@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 08:21:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from arc1.toshiba.co.jp ([133.199.194.235]) by imx2.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id q8IFLFPF024493 for <pcp@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 00:21:15 +0900 (JST)
Received: (from root@localhost) by arc1.toshiba.co.jp id q8IFLFef015950 for pcp@ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 00:21:15 +0900 (JST)
Received: from unknown [133.199.192.144] by arc1.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id AAA15949; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 00:21:15 +0900
Received: from mx.toshiba.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ovp2.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id q8IFLFfj005871 for <pcp@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 00:21:15 +0900 (JST)
Received: from tsbpoa.po.toshiba.co.jp by toshiba.co.jp id q8IFLFHN010241; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 00:21:15 +0900 (JST)
Received: from [133.199.16.234] by mail.po.toshiba.co.jp (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.1 HotFix 0.05 (built Oct 21 2004)) with ESMTPA id <0MAJ00IOBXBE0760@mail.po.toshiba.co.jp> for pcp@ietf.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 00:21:15 +0900 (JST)
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 00:21:15 +0900
From: Yoshihiro Ohba <yoshihiro.ohba@toshiba.co.jp>
In-reply-to: <733EEA93-C216-4C1B-B38A-F8682188FA1A@gmail.com>
To: "pcp@ietf.org" <pcp@ietf.org>
Message-id: <5058916B.2050409@toshiba.co.jp>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-2022-JP"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
References: <CC7C594F.A2A9%repenno@cisco.com> <6A210C2E-B490-47A2-B956-585EA078D22F@yegin.org> <733EEA93-C216-4C1B-B38A-F8682188FA1A@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0
Subject: Re: [pcp] Side-by-side or nested protocols (was Re: 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: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 15:21:18 -0000

Margaret,

> Do you actually think that any nodes that implement SEP 2.0 will
implement PCP?
>

Yes.  A home EMS that is part of SEP2.0 may implement PCP client for
its external broadband connections.  Since a home EMS is a typically a
constrained device, it would be a burden to implement two different
protocols both carrying EAP over UDP.  By using PANA over PCP, such a
device can significantly benefit from code-sharing to carry EAP over
UDP for network access authentication inside 802.15.4 HAN and for
doing PCP for broadband connections.  This also shows why re-inventing
the wheel is a bad idea.

Regards,
Yoshihiro Ohba

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email