Subject: [Hipsec] Registration Extension bis-draft (5203-bis) comments

From: Ari Keranen <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 15:42:19 +0200

Hi all,

Now when we're bis'ing also the registration RFC, it would make sense to add a few more features there. Some of these have been discussed also earlier on this list (these relate to requirements discovered with the native NAT traversal draft [1]), but I'll have them all here for easier reference.

Currently, the registrar has no way of indicating that it would otherwise accept the registration, but it's currently running low on resources. For this purpose, a failure type "Insufficient resources" could be added to the "registration failure types". 

Registration using authentication with certificates could be part of the registration RFC. Currently, only authentication with HI is defined, but knowing all HIs beforehand is not practical in many cases. 

Text in section 3.2. of [1] could be used as a basis for this (just replace "HIP' data relay" with "registrar"). Also, if this authentication mode is added to the draft, failure type "Invalid certificate" should be added for the failure case.

Should we have these in the registration draft?

Cheers,
Ari

[1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-hip-native-nat-traversal