Re: [secdir] Secdir review of draft-ohba-pana-pemk-03

"Alper Yegin" <alper.yegin@yegin.org> Fri, 08 January 2010 07:55 UTC

Return-Path: <alper.yegin@yegin.org>
X-Original-To: secdir@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA39E3A635F; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 23:55:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.531
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.531 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MSGID_MULTIPLE_AT=1.449, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.619]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SofHLtxj2uN5; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 23:55:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mout.perfora.net (mout.perfora.net [74.208.4.195]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE32A28C0EA; Thu, 7 Jan 2010 23:55:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from LENOVO (dsl.static.85-105-43069.ttnet.net.tr [85.105.168.61]) by mrelay.perfora.net (node=mrus0) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0LaVtv-1OBoQh3Ey7-00lufv; Fri, 08 Jan 2010 02:55:28 -0500
From: "Alper Yegin" <alper.yegin@yegin.org>
To: "'Yoshihiro Ohba'" <yoshihiro.ohba@toshiba.co.jp>, "'Russ Mundy'" <mundy@sparta.com>
References: <20100106071553.21C5B17B380F@calvin.home.tislabs.com> <4B46E06D.4070607@toshiba.co.jp>
In-Reply-To: <4B46E06D.4070607@toshiba.co.jp>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 09:55:19 +0200
Message-ID: <029001ca9037$f17bbda0$d47338e0$@yegin@yegin.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AcqQNU1qjPCdMmnlRQ6jQCQwEN/N8gAAmYjw
Content-Language: en-us
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18hcMOsIAPmP6qih6y2d1I4qtU2WUz0LDOXLfq EQ08togdO0/BbY1ylHle0ZzrjXlkGWriqevIL4FuZzXULf2NLd yE2syw4ijO9PMlUhpp8kw==
Cc: jari.arkko@piuha.net, iesg@ietf.org, secdir@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [secdir] Secdir review of draft-ohba-pana-pemk-03
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/secdir>
List-Post: <mailto:secdir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2010 07:55:33 -0000

> > ** To make the scope more clear, I would suggest changing the first
> >    sentence of section 2.2 to read: "One PEMK is used between one PaC
> >    and one EP."
> 
> OK.

There can be multiple PANA sessions between the same PaC and the PAA, hence there can also be multiple PEMKs between the same pair of PaC-EP. This is currently allowed by the specs, and I don't see a need to constrain that with the above sentence.

Alper