Subject: [Hipsec] Notes and minutes

From: [email-masked] (Gonzalo Camarillo)
Date: Wed Mar 10 03:35:01 2004

Folks,

the notes and the draft minutes from the meeting in Seoul are already 
available under:
http://hip.piuha.net/meetings/ietf59/notes/

If you have any comments on the draft minutes, please send them to the 
chairs.

Thanks,

Gonzalo
HIP co-chair

This communication is confidential and intended solely for the addressee(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you believe this message has been sent to you in error, please notify the sender by replying to this transmission and delete the message without disclosing it. Thank you.

E-mail including attachments is susceptible to data corruption, interruption, unauthorized amendment, tampering and viruses, and we only send and receive e-mails on the basis that we are not liable for any such corruption, interception, amendment, tampering or viruses or any consequences thereof.

---

From: [email-masked] (Pekka Nikander)
Date: Fri Mar 12 03:16:00 2004

Gonzalo (and David),

Thanks for compiling the minutes.  They are great in
getting the overall picture.  However, I would also prefer
to see a compilation of the notes, to see the details of the
discussions that took place.  There may be some important
details that might otherwise get dropped.

If you don't have time for such a compilation job, maybe
we should try to employ a WG secretary (as e.g. Mobike
has done), and get him/her to compile the details of the
discussion?

> If you have any comments on the draft minutes, please send them to the 

Two clarifications:

1. Explicit notification:

> Topic: Reject Mechanism: Issue 21
>  Slides presented: pres-ietf59-hip-henderson-reset.ppt
>  Discussions led by: Thomas Henderson
>
>  Issue: do we need a message that notifies the sender that the message 
> received was not acceptable? (instead of just dropping it silently).
>  Discussion: no comments.

I took this as an implicit agreement with Thomas.
But maybe Thomas should perform a consensus call
on the mailing list?

2. DNS:

>  Conclusion: For the HIP DNS work, we should reuse IPSec work as much 
> as possible

Actually, it should be reusing "IPSECKEY", not "IPsec".

--Pekka

---

From: [email-masked] (Gonzalo Camarillo)
Date: Fri Mar 12 03:45:01 2004

Pekka,

thanks for your comments:

 > However, I would also prefer

The notes from the notetakers are available on the supplementary page. 
So, if what you want to do is to be able to have a look at them to see 
what happended, you can do that already. If, on the other hand, you want 
them to appear in the official minutes so that they have official 
status, then we will need to include them there.

If you still think that we should include more detailed discussions in 
the official minutes, let me know and I will take care of that.

Regarding the WG secretary, if we reach a point where both chairs are 
terribly overloaded, we will think of that. For the time being, I 
believe we are OK.

> But maybe Thomas should perform a consensus call

Yes, I prefer to have *explicit* agreements. The process is much clearer 
this way.

> Actually, it should be reusing "IPSECKEY", not "IPsec".

I'll fix it.

Thanks,

Gonzalo

---

From: [email-masked] (Pekka Nikander)
Date: Fri Mar 12 04:05:02 2004

Gonzalo,

> the official minutes, let me know and I will take care of that.

I do.  Sorry about requesting you to spend a couple of hours
on this issue on your already busy schedule, but I do consider
the details of the discussion valuable enough to be spelled out,
corrected by the participants (if they care), and to be submitted
to the secretariat for the proceedings.

--Pekka

---

From: [email-masked] (Gonzalo Camarillo)
Date: Wed Mar 17 05:12:00 2004

Pekka,

the detailed minutes have been posted for a couple of days already at:
http://hip.piuha.net/meetings/ietf59/notes/ietf59-hip-minutes.html

I have not received further comments, so I will be submitting them shortly.

Thanks,

Gonzalo

-- 
Gonzalo Camarillo         Phone :  +358  9 299 33 71
Oy L M Ericsson Ab        Mobile:  +358 40 702 35 35
Telecom R&D               Fax   :  +358  9 299 30 52
FIN-02420 Jorvas          Email :  [email-masked]
Finland                   http://www.hut.fi/~gonzalo

---

From: [email-masked] (Pekka Nikander)
Date: Wed Mar 17 06:02:01 2004

Some corrections:

> Pekka: There are two kinds of IPR. Those mentionned in IPsec are not 
> relevant (Certicom). The others are on mechanisms, I don't think they 
> apply as
>  well. We are not received yet any IPR claims apllying on the base 
> specification.

Pekka:  There have been two kinds of IPR claims.  HIP shares some
public key mechanisms with IKE, and Certicom has made claims on them.
Those have been discussed in the IPsec WG, and the general opinion
seems to be that they are not a problem in usual cases.  Additionally,
some companies (don't remember which) have claimed IPR on the puzzle
mechanism, but as far as I know, there seems to be prior art.  Other
than that, I am not aware of any real or potential IPR claims.
Furthermore, even in the mentioned two cases, there have been no
specific IPR claims on the HIP drafts.

> Pekka: The spec says that the HIP association have a time. If you 
> don't have traffic for some time, you drop association. I don't thoink 
> this is a good behavior. I don't know if we need to specify...

Pekka: The spec says that the HIP association have a lifetime. If you
don't have traffic for some time, you just drop association.  Maybe the
draft is too vague here.  Maybe we need to specify the behaviour in
more specific terms, but that can also be done when the spec advances
from Experimental to Proposed (that is, if it does).

> Pekka: The other protocol we want to look at is the protocol to find 
> RVS... but it goes to the RR. So, 5 pages defining base protocol, 
> using only an additionnal thing for saying
      RG
> "this is not a peer but a RVS". I think the biggest issue is DNS draft.

--Pekka

---

From: [email-masked] (Gonzalo Camarillo)
Date: Thu Mar 18 10:26:02 2004

Fixed.

Thanks,

Gonzalo