[pcp] About selecting a key management for PCP
"Zhangdacheng (Dacheng)" <zhangdacheng@huawei.com> Tue, 31 July 2012 10:53 UTC
Return-Path: <zhangdacheng@huawei.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 BF23021F86B2 for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 03:53:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.548
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.548 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.051, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 z7fxWloAhXrl for <pcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 03:53:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dfwrgout.huawei.com (dfwrgout.huawei.com [206.16.17.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D68521F86B0 for <pcp@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 03:53:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.9.243 (EHLO dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.9.243]) by dfwrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.2.3-GA FastPath) with ESMTP id AIF71922; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 06:53:06 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from DFWEML408-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.134) by dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.108) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 03:51:01 -0700
Received: from SZXEML433-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.72.61.61) by dfweml408-hub.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.134) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 03:51:00 -0700
Received: from SZXEML528-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.120]) by szxeml433-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.72.61.61]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 18:50:57 +0800
From: "Zhangdacheng (Dacheng)" <zhangdacheng@huawei.com>
To: "pcp@ietf.org" <pcp@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: About selecting a key management for PCP
Thread-Index: AQHNbwnvoZws8buZFUaBTiMDCJuBlw==
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 10:50:56 +0000
Message-ID: <C72CBD9FE3CA604887B1B3F1D145D05E2CE62CD3@szxeml528-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [172.24.1.45]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Cc: Margaret Wasserman <mrw@painless-security.com>
Subject: [pcp] About selecting a key management for PCP
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, 31 Jul 2012 10:53:07 -0000
Hi, All: We have a discussion about the selection of a key management mechanism for PCP, but there is not a conclusion yet. Basically, people focus on two solutions, using PANA or generating an in-band authenticaiton mchanism for PCP (actually a simplified PANA). Now, there is a new draft draft-ohba-pcp-pana-00, which tries to specify the first one. So, maybe it is the right time to raise this disucssion again and decide the key management solution for PCP eventually. Cheers Dacheng
- Re: [pcp] About selecting a key management for PCP Alper Yegin
- [pcp] About selecting a key management for PCP Zhangdacheng (Dacheng)
- Re: [pcp] About selecting a key management for PCP Dan Wing
- [pcp] 答复: About selecting a key management for PCP Zhangdacheng (Dacheng)
- Re: [pcp] About selecting a key management for PCP Alper Yegin
- Re: [pcp] About selecting a key management for PCP Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy)