Re: [pcp] Revising PANA side-by-side approach

Hi Yoshi,

The concern that I have with this approach is that it seems short-sited to me...

If we expect PANA to be used as a generic authentication mechanism, rather than being used specifically for network access authentication, I think we need to do two things:

1) Provide a clear explanation of what parts of PANA will be used with PCP.   For example, the notion of a network access enforcement point doesn't really make sense in a PCP context. 
2) Describe a clean mechanism that allows PANA to be used for authentication of other protocols.

Overloading a single bit in the PCP version field, because it happens to coincide with a flag bit in PANA doesn't seem like a method that will work for other protocols, and I am concerned that it doesn't provide a clean basis for moving forward.

Margaret

On Oct 4, 2012, at 11:18 PM, Yoshihiro Ohba wrote:

> Since PCP Version 0 is used by draft-cheshire-nat-pmp, I plan to
> revise PANA side-by-side approach I-D (draft-ohba-pcp-pana) to use
> Bit 0 instead of Bits 5-6-7. The new logic is that when bit 0 is 1 it's
> PANA,
> otherwise it's PCP and alike. If there is an issue with the new logic,
> please let me know.
> 
> I also plan to submit PANA encasulation approach as a separate I-D
> before the next interim meeting.
> 
> Regards,
> Yoshihiro Ohba
> 
> _______________________________________________
> pcp mailing list
> pcp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pcp