[secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-dime-pmip6-02

Tom Yu <tlyu@MIT.EDU> Thu, 13 August 2009 00:41 UTC

Return-Path: <tlyu@MIT.EDU>
X-Original-To: secdir@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B02303A6AD7; Wed, 12 Aug 2009 17:41:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.799
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.799 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.800, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EPT6Y9k7e1ZL; Wed, 12 Aug 2009 17:41:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from biscayne-one-station.mit.edu (BISCAYNE-ONE-STATION.MIT.EDU []) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C47583A67F3; Wed, 12 Aug 2009 17:41:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (OUTGOING-AUTH.MIT.EDU []) by biscayne-one-station.mit.edu (8.13.6/8.9.2) with ESMTP id n7D0eIbB013157; Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:40:18 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from cathode-dark-space.mit.edu (CATHODE-DARK-SPACE.MIT.EDU []) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as tlyu@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.6/8.12.4) with ESMTP id n7D0eFYj023226 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:40:16 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from tlyu@localhost) by cathode-dark-space.mit.edu ( id n7D0eFTe007577; Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:40:15 -0400 (EDT)
To: secdir@ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org, dime-chairs@tools.ietf.org, jouni@gmail.com, julien.bournelle@orange-ftgroup.com, kchowdhury@starentnetworks.com, amuhanna@nortel.com, meyer@umic.rwth-aachen.de
From: Tom Yu <tlyu@MIT.EDU>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:40:15 -0400
Message-ID: <ldvtz0cy2a8.fsf@cathode-dark-space.mit.edu>
Lines: 36
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.42
Subject: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-dime-pmip6-02
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: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 00:41:05 -0000

The Security Considerations section states:

   The security considerations of the Diameter Base protocol [RFC3588],
   Diameter EAP application [RFC4072], Diameter NASREQ application
   [RFC4005] and Diameter Mobile IPv6 integrated scenario bootstrapping
   [RFC5447] are applicable to this document.

Should a reference to RFC 4832 (Security Threats to NETLMM) be
included here?  There appear to be no obvious additional security
considerations beyond those mentioned in the above documents. (if
including the suggested additional citation)

   In general, the Diameter messages may be transported between the HA
   and the Diameter server via one or more AAA brokers or Diameter
   agents.  In this case the HA to the Diameter server AAA communication
   rely on the security properties of the intermediate AAA brokers and
   Diameter agents (such as proxies).

"HA" as used above is not defined in the document, and is used nowhere
else in the document.  Is it a Home Agent?  (which is not really
otherwise mentioned in this document)


"DER" and "DEA" are not defined.  I am fairly sure that "DER" does not
mean "Distinguished Encoding Rules" in this document.

The caption for Figure 4 crosses a page break, making it appear

The term "Local Mobility Anchor" is confusing to me, because it seems
to imply an entity that is local to the Mobile Node, but the term
appears well-established in earlier documents.

draft-ietf-netlmm-pmip6-ipv4-support is now on revision #14, but is
cited as "-11".