Subject: [Dime] Re-Confirming HUM: draft-cakulev-ikev2-psk-diamter

From: "Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 22:52:25 +0200

Hi all, 

During the IETF meeting we had a presentation for 
http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-cakulev-ikev2-psk-diamter

I asked for feedback and 7 persons were in favor of the document
becoming a WG item and nobody against. 

Please provide additional feedback (for or against) by the 22nd of
December. 

Ciao
Hannes

---

From: Tom Taylor <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 22:06:37 -0500

YES

Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo) wrote:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> DiME mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime

---

From: Qin Wu <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 16:55:32 +0800

Re-Confirming HUM: draft-cakulev-ikev2-psk-diamterYES.
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo) 
  To: [email-masked] 
  Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 4:52 AM
  Subject: [Dime] Re-Confirming HUM: draft-cakulev-ikev2-psk-diamter

  Hi all, 

  I asked for feedback and 7 persons were in favor of the document becoming a WG item and nobody against. 

  Please provide additional feedback (for or against) by the 22nd of December. 

  Ciao 
  Hannes 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Julien Bournelle <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 11:32:43 +0100

Hello,

 A question for this document: do we know the use-case for this ?

 Regards,

 Julien

On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:52 PM, Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo) <
[email-masked]> wrote:

> *http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-cakulev-ikev2-psk-diamter*<http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-cakulev-ikev2-psk-diamter>
>

---

From: "Glen Zorn" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 13:32:45 -0800

OK w/me.  The supplied link is broken, though; a correct one is
<http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-cakulev-ikev2-psk-diameter-00.txt>
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-cakulev-ikev2-psk-diameter-00.txt.

Hope this helps.

~gwz

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)
Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 12:52 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [Dime] Re-Confirming HUM: draft-cakulev-ikev2-psk-diamter

Hi all, 

During the IETF meeting we had a presentation for 
 <http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-cakulev-ikev2-psk-diamter>
http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-cakulev-ikev2-psk-diamter 

I asked for feedback and 7 persons were in favor of the document becoming a
WG item and nobody against. 

Ciao 
Hannes

---

From: "Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 12:04:19 +0200

Hi Julien, 
 
when you look at the Diameter Mobile IPv6 HA<->AAA interaction then
there are different ways for authenticating the mobile node. We have
supported a number of authentication mechanisms already in
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-dime-mip6-split-17.txt and the usage
of a PSK is another possible option, which is documented in
draft-cakulev-ikev2-psk-diameter. 

We had some challenges to get the security mechanisms right when we
worked on draft-ietf-dime-mip6-split but we were also under pressure to
get the document completed and hence we removed the PSK support (and the
Cert support, I believe). It seems that a number of folks in the working
group believe that they can solve these technical challenges and the
feedback from the group was in favor of the document. 
 
Ciao
Hannes

________________________________

	From: ext Julien Bournelle [mailto:[email-masked]] 
	Sent: 16 December, 2009 12:33
	To: Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - FI/Espoo)
	Cc: [email-masked]
	Subject: Re: [Dime] Re-Confirming HUM:
draft-cakulev-ikev2-psk-diamter

	Hello,
	
	 A question for this document: do we know the use-case for this
?
	
	 Regards,
	
	 Julien

	On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:52 PM, Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN -
FI/Espoo) <[email-masked]> wrote:

		Hi all, 

		I asked for feedback and 7 persons were in favor of the
document becoming a WG item and nobody against. 

		Please provide additional feedback (for or against) by
the 22nd of December. 

		Ciao 
		Hannes