From mailman-bounces@machshav.com Wed Jun 1 01:04:25 2005 Received: from machshav.com (machshav.com [147.28.0.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA27944 for ; Wed, 1 Jun 2005 01:04:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 7DC57FB289; Wed, 1 Jun 2005 01:04:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from machshav.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E19DFB2B4 for ; Wed, 1 Jun 2005 01:01:03 -0400 (EDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: machshav.com mailing list memberships reminder From: mailman-owner@machshav.com To: mobike-archive@ietf.org X-No-Archive: yes Message-ID: Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 05:00:11 +0000 Precedence: bulk X-BeenThere: mailman@machshav.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 List-Id: mailman.machshav.com X-List-Administrivia: yes Sender: mailman-bounces@machshav.com Errors-To: mailman-bounces@machshav.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This is a reminder, sent out once a month, about your machshav.com mailing list memberships. It includes your subscription info and how to use it to change it or unsubscribe from a list. You can visit the URLs to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. In addition to the URL interfaces, you can also use email to make such changes. For more info, send a message to the '-request' address of the list (for example, mailman-request@machshav.com) containing just the word 'help' in the message body, and an email message will be sent to you with instructions. If you have questions, problems, comments, etc, send them to mailman-owner@machshav.com. Thanks! Passwords for mobike-archive@lists.ietf.org: List Password // URL ---- -------- mobike@machshav.com behoef https://www.machshav.com/mailman/options.cgi/mobike/mobike-archive%40lists.ietf.org From mobike-bounces@machshav.com Thu Jun 2 02:18:05 2005 Received: from machshav.com (machshav.com [147.28.0.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA03432 for ; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 02:18:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 4F387FB286; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 02:18:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from machshav.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E21BFB282; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 02:18:03 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: mobike@machshav.com Delivered-To: mobike@machshav.com Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 1EA4BFB284; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 02:18:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [193.234.218.130]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F318FFB281 for ; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 02:17:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [193.234.218.130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C5738988A for ; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 09:17:58 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <429EA497.3090803@piuha.net> Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 09:17:59 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: MOBIKE Mailing List References: <200506012003.QAA24352@ietf.org> In-Reply-To: <200506012003.QAA24352@ietf.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Mobike] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-nikander-esp-beet-mode-03.txt X-BeenThere: mobike@machshav.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile/Multihoming IKEv2 IETF list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Errors-To: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit FYI: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote: >A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. > > > Title : A Bound End-to-End Tunnel (BEET) mode for ESP > Author(s) : P. Nikander, J. Melen > Filename : draft-nikander-esp-beet-mode-03.txt > Pages : 29 > Date : 2005-6-1 > >This document specifies a new mode, called Bound End-to-End Tunnel > (BEET) mode, for IPsec ESP. The new mode augments the existing ESP > tunnel and transport modes. For end-to-end tunnels, the new mode > provides limited tunnel mode semantics without the regular tunnel > mode overhead. The mode is intended to support new uses of ESP, > including mobility and multi-address multi-homing. > >A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-nikander-esp-beet-mode-03.txt > >To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to >i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. >You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce >to change your subscription settings. > > >Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username >"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, >type "cd internet-drafts" and then > "get draft-nikander-esp-beet-mode-03.txt". > >A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in >http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html >or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > > >Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > >Send a message to: > mailserv@ietf.org. >In the body type: > "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-nikander-esp-beet-mode-03.txt". > >NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" > command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split > up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on > how to manipulate these messages. > > >Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader >implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the >Internet-Draft. > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >I-D-Announce mailing list >I-D-Announce@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > > _______________________________________________ Mobike mailing list Mobike@machshav.com https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike From mobike-bounces@machshav.com Thu Jun 2 11:59:48 2005 Received: from machshav.com (machshav.com [147.28.0.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA01683 for ; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 11:59:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id D3928FB28E; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 11:59:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from machshav.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 892D7FB289; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 11:59:38 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: mobike@machshav.com Delivered-To: mobike@machshav.com Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 7288AFB28B; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 11:59:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mgw-ext03.nokia.com (mgw-ext03.nokia.com [131.228.20.95]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96B20FB282 for ; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 11:59:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from esebh108.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh108.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.143.145]) by mgw-ext03.nokia.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id j52FvNLV007637 for ; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 18:57:27 +0300 Received: from esebh101.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.138.177]) by esebh108.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 2 Jun 2005 18:59:33 +0300 Received: from esebe105.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.143.53]) by esebh101.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 2 Jun 2005 18:59:32 +0300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Mobike] issue 19 -- same addresses for both directions? Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2005 18:59:32 +0300 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [Mobike] issue 19 -- same addresses for both directions? Thread-Index: AcVmSXaujj/seZOBR0iM7eys4HLlqABQit8w From: To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Jun 2005 15:59:32.0966 (UTC) FILETIME=[1115F060:01C5678C] X-BeenThere: mobike@machshav.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile/Multihoming IKEv2 IETF list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Errors-To: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mohan Parthasarathy wrote: > If the initiator is multi-homed and connected simultaneously to=20 > more than one access (e.g. UMTS and WLAN) at the same time, there > might be some usefulness in having different paths for upstream=20 > and downstream traffic though i don't know really what it is :-) =20 I sort of agree with this: there might be some usefulness in this, but I can't really give any good examples.=20 Thus, I think we should follow the KISS principle and assume both=20 directions use the same address pair. (If it turns out later that there is some real important use for this, it can be added then.) Best regards, Pasi _______________________________________________ Mobike mailing list Mobike@machshav.com https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike From mobike-bounces@machshav.com Thu Jun 2 12:16:42 2005 Received: from machshav.com (machshav.com [147.28.0.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA03382 for ; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 12:16:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id A4C6BFB291; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 12:16:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from machshav.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C813EFB28B; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 12:16:39 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: mobike@machshav.com Delivered-To: mobike@machshav.com Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id D1C11FB28D; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 12:16:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [193.234.218.130]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41DE8FB289 for ; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 12:16:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [193.234.218.130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBC2D8988A; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 19:16:36 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <429F30E6.8080608@piuha.net> Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 19:16:38 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com Subject: Re: [Mobike] issue 19 -- same addresses for both directions? References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: mobike@machshav.com X-BeenThere: mobike@machshav.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile/Multihoming IKEv2 IETF list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Errors-To: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com wrote: >(If it turns out later that >there is some real important use for this, it can be added then.) > > This is a good observation. In some cases we make decisions that cannot be easily reversed; in this case we are making a limitation that could (or so it appears) be easily lifted when in year N we want to use MOBIKE for something that requires it. But I would personnally really like to do only the absolutely necessary things right now, if not for other reason than the ability to complete the RFC as soon as possible. --Jari _______________________________________________ Mobike mailing list Mobike@machshav.com https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike From mobike-bounces@machshav.com Thu Jun 2 12:20:47 2005 Received: from machshav.com (machshav.com [147.28.0.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA03717 for ; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 12:20:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 9BD35FB293; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 12:20:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from machshav.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F834FB28D; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 12:20:46 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: mobike@machshav.com Delivered-To: mobike@machshav.com Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id DE9FAFB291; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 12:20:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtp811.mail.sc5.yahoo.com (smtp811.mail.sc5.yahoo.com [66.163.170.81]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 11AD7FB28B for ; Thu, 2 Jun 2005 12:20:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from unknown (HELO adithya) (mohanp@sbcglobal.net@64.172.56.15 with login) by smtp811.mail.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 2 Jun 2005 16:20:43 -0000 Message-ID: <005401c5678f$08bac7d0$6501a8c0@adithya> From: "Mohan Parthasarathy" To: , References: Subject: Re: [Mobike] issue 19 -- same addresses for both directions? Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2005 09:20:46 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 X-BeenThere: mobike@machshav.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile/Multihoming IKEv2 IETF list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Errors-To: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Agreed. mohan ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 8:59 AM Subject: RE: [Mobike] issue 19 -- same addresses for both directions? Mohan Parthasarathy wrote: > If the initiator is multi-homed and connected simultaneously to > more than one access (e.g. UMTS and WLAN) at the same time, there > might be some usefulness in having different paths for upstream > and downstream traffic though i don't know really what it is :-) I sort of agree with this: there might be some usefulness in this, but I can't really give any good examples. Thus, I think we should follow the KISS principle and assume both directions use the same address pair. (If it turns out later that there is some real important use for this, it can be added then.) Best regards, Pasi _______________________________________________ Mobike mailing list Mobike@machshav.com https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike _______________________________________________ Mobike mailing list Mobike@machshav.com https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike From mobike-bounces@machshav.com Fri Jun 3 04:24:12 2005 Received: from machshav.com (machshav.com [147.28.0.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA03098 for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 04:24:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 9F719FB28D; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 04:24:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from machshav.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0058FB289; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 04:24:07 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: mobike@machshav.com Delivered-To: mobike@machshav.com Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id AB7C4FB28A; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 04:24:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from gecko.sbs.de (gecko.sbs.de [194.138.37.40]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AC25FB282 for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 04:24:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail1.sbs.de (mail1.sbs.de [192.129.41.35]) by gecko.sbs.de (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id j538O1Wu022622; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 10:24:01 +0200 Received: from fthw9xoa.ww002.siemens.net (fthw9xoa.ww002.siemens.net [157.163.133.201]) by mail1.sbs.de (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id j538O0hl011917; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 10:24:01 +0200 Received: from MCHP7IEA.ww002.siemens.net ([139.25.131.145]) by fthw9xoa.ww002.siemens.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.0); Fri, 3 Jun 2005 10:24:00 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: AW: [Mobike] issue 19 -- same addresses for both directions? Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2005 10:23:59 +0200 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [Mobike] issue 19 -- same addresses for both directions? Thread-Index: AcVXnU81jNdfuL39QAKd3uhU6yTd4QP8dZvw From: "Tschofenig, Hannes" To: "Jari Arkko" , "MOBIKE Mailing List" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 03 Jun 2005 08:24:00.0368 (UTC) FILETIME=[98003700:01C56815] X-BeenThere: mobike@machshav.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile/Multihoming IKEv2 IETF list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Errors-To: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable hi jari, =20 we should use the same addresses in both directions.=20 this seems to be much easier (from a protocol point of view and regarding the traversal of nats/stateful packet filtering firewalls). =20 ciao hannes =20 > It looks to me that the decision on issue 20 (who decides) > is the main determining factor issue 19 as well. If issue > 20 resolution is that the initiator decides, then it more > or less follows that we have same addresses in both > directions. We can imagine different addresses even in > this case, but it does not appear to be very useful or > necessary. >=20 > On the other hand, if we decide in 20 that the decisions > are independent, then it may in fact be very hard to > ensure that the two directions use the same addresses. > As a result, allowing different addresses would make > more sense in this scenario. >=20 > My conclusion is that we should focus on trying to > solve issue 20 first. >=20 > --Jari >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Mobike mailing list > Mobike@machshav.com > https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike >=20 _______________________________________________ Mobike mailing list Mobike@machshav.com https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike From mobike-bounces@machshav.com Fri Jun 3 14:42:52 2005 Received: from machshav.com (machshav.com [147.28.0.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA21850 for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 14:42:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 01CF6FB28B; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 14:42:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from machshav.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E855FB289; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 14:42:44 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: mobike@machshav.com Delivered-To: mobike@machshav.com Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id CE27DFB28A; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 14:42:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from brmea-mail-4.sun.com (brmea-mail-4.Sun.COM [192.18.98.36]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40305FB282 for ; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 14:42:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from eastmail1bur.East.Sun.COM ([129.148.9.49]) by brmea-mail-4.sun.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j53Igcau011955; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 12:42:39 -0600 (MDT) Received: from thunk.east.sun.com (thunk.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.66]) by eastmail1bur.East.Sun.COM (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.10/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id j53IgcFt022319; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 14:42:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 127.0.0.1 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thunk.east.sun.com (8.13.3+Sun/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j53Igcwn009549; Fri, 3 Jun 2005 14:42:38 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [Mobike] issue 19 -- same addresses for both directions? From: Bill Sommerfeld To: Jari Arkko In-Reply-To: <4299D1AD.6000004@piuha.net> References: <4284716E.2080404@piuha.net> <4299D1AD.6000004@piuha.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Message-Id: <1117824157.8354.402.camel@thunk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6.309 Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2005 14:42:38 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: MOBIKE Mailing List X-BeenThere: mobike@machshav.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile/Multihoming IKEv2 IETF list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Errors-To: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sun, 2005-05-29 at 10:29, Jari Arkko wrote: > Of course, this does not necessarily have to be done. > We could develop a protocol that provides independent > addresses, yet would be controlled by the initiator. I haven't seen a compelling scenario which requires a different address-pair in each direction. That said, "initiator decides" effectively means "initiator tells responder which addresses the responder should use when sending" and may be silent about what the initiator does when sending -- unless we require the reciever to reject traffic to/from the wrong address pair. So I think, given our resolution to #20, #19 becomes almost a local matter on the initiator. - Bill _______________________________________________ Mobike mailing list Mobike@machshav.com https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike From mobike-bounces@machshav.com Wed Jun 8 03:51:10 2005 Received: from machshav.com (machshav.com [147.28.0.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA04113 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 03:51:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id EB7D9FB285; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 03:51:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from machshav.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1102FB27F; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 03:51:04 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: mobike@machshav.com Delivered-To: mobike@machshav.com Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 4DD5BFB283; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 03:51:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [192.44.77.17]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C76EFB266 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 03:51:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [193.52.74.194]) by laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.11.6p2/8.11.6/2003.04.01) with ESMTP id j587omx23319; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 09:50:48 +0200 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (localhost.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [127.0.0.1]) by givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j587olrK025854; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 09:50:48 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from dupont@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr) Message-Id: <200506080750.j587olrK025854@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> From: Francis Dupont To: Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com Subject: Re: [Mobike] issues 18, 15, 6 -- return routability In-reply-to: Your message of Mon, 09 May 2005 17:29:22 +0300. Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2005 09:50:47 +0200 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) at enst-bretagne.fr Cc: mobike@machshav.com X-BeenThere: mobike@machshav.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile/Multihoming IKEv2 IETF list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Errors-To: mobike-bounces@machshav.com In your previous mail you wrote: I think we came to agreement on when we can skip the test completely (by default, do the check; fancier authorization is possible but does not have to be standardized). But what about the before/after moving the traffic part? => my opinion is the optional RR check SHOULD be done before but the recommendation has to be relax (i.e., implementation choice) when the previous address is known to no more work: there is a trade-off between waiting for the RR check result and go immediately to the new and working path. Regards Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr PS: in an address set management framework, a no more working address is simply removed from the set. _______________________________________________ Mobike mailing list Mobike@machshav.com https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike From mobike-bounces@machshav.com Wed Jun 8 04:08:15 2005 Received: from machshav.com (machshav.com [147.28.0.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA05172 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 04:08:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 385A2FB291; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 04:08:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from machshav.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A4C1FB286; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 04:08:11 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: mobike@machshav.com Delivered-To: mobike@machshav.com Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id EB9C4FB289; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 04:08:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [192.44.77.17]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ADDBFB284 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 04:08:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [193.52.74.194]) by laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.11.6p2/8.11.6/2003.04.01) with ESMTP id j58882x24525; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 10:08:02 +0200 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (localhost.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [127.0.0.1]) by givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j588823e025986; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 10:08:02 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from dupont@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr) Message-Id: <200506080808.j588823e025986@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> From: Francis Dupont To: Jari Arkko Subject: Re: [Mobike] issue 3 - nats In-reply-to: Your message of Sun, 29 May 2005 17:38:25 +0300. <4299D3E1.70508@piuha.net> Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2005 10:08:02 +0200 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) at enst-bretagne.fr Cc: MOBIKE Mailing List X-BeenThere: mobike@machshav.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile/Multihoming IKEv2 IETF list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Errors-To: mobike-bounces@machshav.com In your previous mail you wrote: Resolution: (a) Can we move behind a NAT? [Yes. But requires NAT-D payloads in the address change message, as discussed under issue 11.] => NAT-D or NAT-P (both detect NATs), see item j. (b) Can we move out from a NAT? [Yes. But see item h.] (c) To which extent do we support the case that party outside the NAT moves? [No. Outsider may not be able to initiate anything inside. The only exception is covered under item f.] (d) If we are behind a NAT, can peer have multiple addresses? [Yes.] => what is the real meaning of the question (NAT-T one side, MOBIKE the other side?) (e) If we are behind a NAT on one interface, can another interface work without NAT/NAT-T? [Yes.] => I disagree if this gives extra complexity. (f) Can the responder be behind a NAT? [Yes, but in a very limited scenario, when the NAT is a static NAT and not a NAPT.] => I don't see the interest to support this very limited scenario. (g) Do we need NAT prevention? [Yes.] (h) Do we want to disable UDP encapsulation when moving outside from behind a NAT? [Yes.] (i) Send keepalives on current or on all paths? [Just the current one, as the "initiator decides" solution that we have picked in issue 20 makes this the logical choice here.] (j) How do we detect NATs? [Using NAT-T functionality.] => NAT-D or NAT-P (k) Is NAT-T support still optional within MOBIKE? [Yes. You should be able to use MOBIKE in plain v6 environments, for instance.] => the IPv6 case is very important because of the use of IPsec by MIPv6 (a MIPv6 Home Agent and a MOBIKE Security Gateway is nearly the same thing) and of the style of multihoming used for IPv6. Regards Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr _______________________________________________ Mobike mailing list Mobike@machshav.com https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike From mobike-bounces@machshav.com Wed Jun 8 04:19:03 2005 Received: from machshav.com (machshav.com [147.28.0.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA05964 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 04:19:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id E1107FB28E; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 04:18:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from machshav.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 686A1FB289; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 04:18:56 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: mobike@machshav.com Delivered-To: mobike@machshav.com Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 69BEBFB28E; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 04:18:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [192.44.77.17]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC191FB286 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 04:18:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [193.52.74.194]) by laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.11.6p2/8.11.6/2003.04.01) with ESMTP id j588Ijx25071; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 10:18:45 +0200 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (localhost.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [127.0.0.1]) by givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j588IjjZ026027; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 10:18:45 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from dupont@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr) Message-Id: <200506080818.j588IjjZ026027@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> From: Francis Dupont To: Jari Arkko Subject: Re: [Mobike] straw poll on issue 20 (selection ipsec sa addresses and who decides) In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 18 May 2005 15:12:02 +0300. <428B3112.9020808@piuha.net> Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2005 10:18:45 +0200 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) at enst-bretagne.fr Cc: MOBIKE Mailing List X-BeenThere: mobike@machshav.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile/Multihoming IKEv2 IETF list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Errors-To: mobike-bounces@machshav.com In your previous mail you wrote: in more detail, but essentially its a question of the following choice: Option 5: "Peers decide the source addresses independently" => I am already known to be in favor of option 5 with f_A() from RFC 3484. Regards Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr PS: I'll answer to other messages but my principles are: - the destination address has to be decided by the peer, this is critical. - the source address selection is not critical (or should not be :-), RFC 3484 proposes a reasonnable and standardized way to select the proper source address according to the destination address. Perhaps I am a bit IPv6 centric but I can't see a good reason to do something special for IPsec. _______________________________________________ Mobike mailing list Mobike@machshav.com https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike From mobike-bounces@machshav.com Wed Jun 8 04:27:25 2005 Received: from machshav.com (machshav.com [147.28.0.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA06253 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 04:27:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 344EDFB292; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 04:27:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from machshav.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89FBEFB289; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 04:27:21 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: mobike@machshav.com Delivered-To: mobike@machshav.com Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 07004FB28E; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 04:27:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [192.44.77.17]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0FD0FB286 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 04:27:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [193.52.74.194]) by laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.11.6p2/8.11.6/2003.04.01) with ESMTP id j588R9x25555; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 10:27:09 +0200 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (localhost.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [127.0.0.1]) by givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j588R9wa026055; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 10:27:09 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from dupont@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr) Message-Id: <200506080827.j588R9wa026055@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> From: Francis Dupont To: "James Kempf" Subject: Re: [Mobike] straw poll on issue 20 (selection ipsec sa addresses andwho decides) In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 18 May 2005 10:15:04 PDT. <014f01c55bcd$26394d40$016115ac@dcml.docomolabsusa.com> Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2005 10:27:09 +0200 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) at enst-bretagne.fr Cc: MOBIKE Mailing List , Jari Arkko X-BeenThere: mobike@machshav.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile/Multihoming IKEv2 IETF list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Errors-To: mobike-bounces@machshav.com In your previous mail you wrote: I prefer option 3. => I explain why I disagree: option 3 is too dedicated to the mobile client to VPN gateway case, i.e., when A and B are multihomed the only way for the looser (i.e., B) to enforce the choice of its address is to cheat by announcing a List_B reduced to one address... Regards Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr _______________________________________________ Mobike mailing list Mobike@machshav.com https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike From mobike-bounces@machshav.com Wed Jun 8 04:37:11 2005 Received: from machshav.com (machshav.com [147.28.0.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA06775 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 04:37:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 4089CFB294; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 04:37:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from machshav.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38C36FB290; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 04:37:06 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: mobike@machshav.com Delivered-To: mobike@machshav.com Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id F16D7FB291; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 04:37:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [192.44.77.17]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C3C2FB289 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 04:37:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [193.52.74.194]) by laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.11.6p2/8.11.6/2003.04.01) with ESMTP id j588avx26388; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 10:36:57 +0200 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (localhost.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [127.0.0.1]) by givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j588avq5026110; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 10:36:57 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from dupont@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr) Message-Id: <200506080836.j588avq5026110@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> From: Francis Dupont To: "Mohan Parthasarathy" Subject: Re: [Mobike] straw poll on issue 20 (selection ipsec sa addresses andwho decides) In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 19 May 2005 14:52:42 PDT. <001701c55cbd$17720590$6501a8c0@adithya> Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2005 10:36:57 +0200 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) at enst-bretagne.fr Cc: MOBIKE Mailing List , Jari Arkko X-BeenThere: mobike@machshav.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile/Multihoming IKEv2 IETF list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Errors-To: mobike-bounces@machshav.com In your previous mail you wrote: > Option 3: "Initiator decides" > I am assuming that this means that the initiator tests for bidirectional reachability and then tells the peer about the working address. One main reason why this seems favorable is because it works well with NATs and Firewalls. It does not mean that it does not work when they are not there. But may not work ideally e.g. two SGs connected and only one of them can decide. So, why build a protocol with this limitation ? Does providing an option for either one of them to choose or both of them to choose complicate the protocol (perhaps there could be the ping-pong effect of each one changing back and forth if both of them can choose) ? For example, the initiator says that it wants to be the deciding factor. The responder knows that the initiator is not behind a NAT (by looking at NAT-D payloads), then it might be okay for the responder to choose also, right ? So, the responder can also choose to be the deciding factor in this case. Though i *like* this option, it might make sense to provide some flexibility for this option. => you seem a candidate for option 5 (don't forget that RFC 3484 is a predictable algorithm and List_B is likely to be known before sending the first packet, and BTW how the addresses of this first packet are chosen?). Regards Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr PS: in my address set management framework, List_B is initialized by the first packet destination address. In the common case the result will be the same than option 3 but B has the capability to change its address. _______________________________________________ Mobike mailing list Mobike@machshav.com https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike From mobike-bounces@machshav.com Wed Jun 8 05:36:20 2005 Received: from machshav.com (machshav.com [147.28.0.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA10741 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 05:36:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 184B8FB293; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 05:36:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from machshav.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31716FB286; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 05:36:13 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: mobike@machshav.com Delivered-To: mobike@machshav.com Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id DAD18FB289; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 05:36:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [192.44.77.17]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DAF9FB284 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 05:36:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [193.52.74.194]) by laposte.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.11.6p2/8.11.6/2003.04.01) with ESMTP id j589a4x31207; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 11:36:04 +0200 Received: from givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (localhost.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr [127.0.0.1]) by givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j589a3aL026363; Wed, 8 Jun 2005 11:36:03 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from dupont@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr) Message-Id: <200506080936.j589a3aL026363@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> From: Francis Dupont To: Jari Arkko Subject: Re: [Mobike] issue 19 -- same addresses for both directions? In-reply-to: Your message of Sun, 29 May 2005 17:29:01 +0300. <4299D1AD.6000004@piuha.net> Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2005 11:36:03 +0200 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) at enst-bretagne.fr Cc: MOBIKE Mailing List X-BeenThere: mobike@machshav.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile/Multihoming IKEv2 IETF list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Errors-To: mobike-bounces@machshav.com In your previous mail you wrote: How do you folks feel about this? Please post your comments by Friday, June 3rd. => note I consider that I am not bound by your short delays... It seems we lost the basic idea: the only critical thing is the destination address the peer uses to send packets to us, and we really need to control it, this is why the option 3 for issue 20 is *not* the right one. About issue 19, I believe: - an SA pair MUST be created with the same address pair (just to avoid to provide a way to do something else) - an SA pair SHOULD use the same address pair (this doesn't close the door and avoid a spurious requirement). Regards Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr PS: to come back to issue 20, it doesn't exist in my address set management framework because it uses the option 2 (use primary address) initialized by the addresses IKE runs over (i.e., without crazy filtering on the path the address pair is proved to work by IKE itself :-). BTW I don't provide a way to use different address pair per way, only per SA pair (which IMHO is enough to support SCTP[-like] contexts). _______________________________________________ Mobike mailing list Mobike@machshav.com https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike From mobike-bounces@machshav.com Thu Jun 9 15:50:00 2005 Received: from machshav.com (machshav.com [147.28.0.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA09707 for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2005 15:49:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 48368FB291; Thu, 9 Jun 2005 15:49:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from machshav.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F779FB28A; Thu, 9 Jun 2005 15:49:57 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: mobike@machshav.com Delivered-To: mobike@machshav.com Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 92627FB28D; Thu, 9 Jun 2005 15:49:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from above.proper.com (above.proper.com [208.184.76.39]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EABC1FB284 for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2005 15:49:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [10.20.30.249] (dsl2-63-249-92-231.cruzio.com [63.249.92.231]) (authenticated bits=0) by above.proper.com (8.12.11/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j59Jnq1v066090 for ; Thu, 9 Jun 2005 12:49:53 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <4299D5AE.7070503@piuha.net> References: <428B3112.9020808@piuha.net> <4299D5AE.7070503@piuha.net> Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 12:49:34 -0700 To: MOBIKE Mailing List From: Paul Hoffman Subject: Re: [Mobike] issue status Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-BeenThere: mobike@machshav.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile/Multihoming IKEv2 IETF list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Errors-To: mobike-bounces@machshav.com At 5:46 PM +0300 5/29/05, Jari Arkko wrote: >The issue list has five pending issues, some of which are now >being closed. This e-mail attempts to summarize the status >of those five issues: > >3 (nat) -- My suggestion is that we close this issue at > the level of detail we have now, and open new > issues during protocol work, if necessary. See > http://www.machshav.com/pipermail/mobike/2005-May/000807.html > >6 (rr) -- closed. See > http://www.machshav.com/pipermail/mobike/2005-May/000806.html > >11 (window) -- closed, but here too we may open new issues > when we see two alternative proposals here, now just one > proposal available. See also > http://www.machshav.com/pipermail/mobike/2005-May/000778.html > >19 (same addresses in both directions) -- pending, discussion to > end by Friday. See > http://www.machshav.com/pipermail/mobike/2005-May/000805.html > >20 (who decides) -- closed > http://www.machshav.com/pipermail/mobike/2005-May/000804.html Wearing my co-chair hat, I agree with Jari's reading of the consensus of the WG on all five issues. Two notes: - The sub-issues of #3 (NATs) may get opened again as we explore the protocol that comes out of this, but the long list of resolutions should be the starting model for our work. - The consensus on the extended discussion of issue 19 was to have the same address pairs in both directions. There was a bit of interest in re-exploring this once we have a protocol in front of us. With that, it seems like all the closable issues have been closed. --Paul Hoffman, Director --VPN Consortium _______________________________________________ Mobike mailing list Mobike@machshav.com https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike From mobike-bounces@machshav.com Fri Jun 10 05:24:07 2005 Received: from machshav.com (machshav.com [147.28.0.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA28053 for ; Fri, 10 Jun 2005 05:24:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 83696FB2A1; Fri, 10 Jun 2005 05:24:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from machshav.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31EACFB29F; Fri, 10 Jun 2005 05:24:02 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: mobike@machshav.com Delivered-To: mobike@machshav.com Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 60839FB2A0; Fri, 10 Jun 2005 05:24:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [193.234.218.130]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE4C4FB29E for ; Fri, 10 Jun 2005 05:24:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [193.234.218.130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39C6C89832; Fri, 10 Jun 2005 12:23:58 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <42A95C33.6060306@piuha.net> Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 12:24:03 +0300 From: Jari Arkko User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pasi Eronen , MOBIKE Mailing List References: <428B3112.9020808@piuha.net> <4299D5AE.7070503@piuha.net> <4299E42C.6090705@piuha.net> In-Reply-To: <4299E42C.6090705@piuha.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Paul Hoffman Subject: [Mobike] protocol work and editor X-BeenThere: mobike@machshav.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile/Multihoming IKEv2 IETF list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Errors-To: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit As indicated a while ago, we'll be proceeding to official protocol work now. The intention is to get a WG draft out in its -00 form still in this month, constructed according to the discussions and issue resolutions we have had during the last year or so. Once we have the initial draft out, we can start reviewing it and figuring out what problems we still see in it. We will also discuss this in Paris. The protocol will be called MOBIKE, and will most likely look a bit to some (or all) individual proposals we've seen in the past. Appropriate acknowledgements for contributions will be applied, of course. We are happy to announce that Pasi Eronen has agreed to be the editor for this protocol work. Thanks Pasi for taking on the job -- I know everyone is looking forward to seeing the first draft! --Jari _______________________________________________ Mobike mailing list Mobike@machshav.com https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike From mobike-bounces@machshav.com Wed Jun 29 06:54:29 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DnaD7-0001v4-8D for mobike-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 06:54:29 -0400 Received: from machshav.com (machshav.com [147.28.0.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA04116 for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 06:54:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 47F24FB291; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 06:54:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from machshav.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99235FB286; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 06:54:18 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: mobike@machshav.com Delivered-To: mobike@machshav.com Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id A85E5FB289; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 06:54:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mgw-ext02.nokia.com (mgw-ext02.nokia.com [131.228.20.94]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB8B2FB24A for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 06:54:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from esebh106.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh106.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.213]) by mgw-ext02.nokia.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id j5TAsFCI015132 for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 13:54:15 +0300 Received: from esebh101.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.138.177]) by esebh106.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 29 Jun 2005 13:54:14 +0300 Received: from esebe105.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.143.53]) by esebh101.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 29 Jun 2005 13:54:14 +0300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 13:54:14 +0300 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: MOBIKE protocol document -00 Thread-Index: AcV8mOODX8ChR/UqRcK4FOtD/0Z+8w== From: To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Jun 2005 10:54:14.0911 (UTC) FILETIME=[E3D3D0F0:01C57C98] Subject: [Mobike] MOBIKE protocol document -00 X-BeenThere: mobike@machshav.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile/Multihoming IKEv2 IETF list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Errors-To: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi everyone, I've submitted version -00 of the MOBIKE protocol document.=20 It will be available from the I-D directory soon, but meanwhile,=20 a temporary copy is available from here: http://people.nokia.net/~pasi/TEMP-draft-ietf-mobike-protocol-00.txt Keep in mind that this is -00 version, and thus is meant as a starting point for discussions, not as finished protocol. This also moves us to a different phase of issue tracking. =20 So far, the issues have been marked as "questions", being=20 mostly design decisions and miscellaneous discussion. From=20 now on, I'd like to see more detailed technical and editorial=20 issues that propose concrete changes to the document. These issues should say what needs to be done to the document to make it acceptable to the submitter of the issue, preferably in the form "in Section X.Y text about Z has a problem because ..explanation..; I propose changing it to ..text..". Positive comments ("I've read this, and parts X,Y,Z looks=20 reasonably OK to me") are also welcome; this would help us=20 to focus our work on those parts that need it. (BTW, I hope to make -01 version before the I-D cut-off date, so don't wait for Paris before sending your comments :-) Best regards, Pasi _______________________________________________ Mobike mailing list Mobike@machshav.com https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike From mobike-bounces@machshav.com Wed Jun 29 12:09:38 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Dnf86-00039z-Cl for mobike-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 12:09:38 -0400 Received: from machshav.com (machshav.com [147.28.0.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA06071 for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 12:09:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 8E345FB289; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 12:09:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from machshav.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A73DFB282; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 12:09:33 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: mobike@machshav.com Delivered-To: mobike@machshav.com Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id C37B6FB283; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 12:09:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from above.proper.com (above.proper.com [208.184.76.39]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DA43FB281 for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 12:09:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [10.20.30.249] (adsl-66-125-125-65.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [66.125.125.65]) (authenticated bits=0) by above.proper.com (8.12.11/8.12.9) with ESMTP id j5TG9SvR084900; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 09:09:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 09:09:25 -0700 To: , From: Paul Hoffman Subject: Re: [Mobike] MOBIKE protocol document -00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-BeenThere: mobike@machshav.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile/Multihoming IKEv2 IETF list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Errors-To: mobike-bounces@machshav.com At 1:54 PM +0300 6/29/05, wrote: >(BTW, I hope to make -01 version before the I-D cut-off date, >so don't wait for Paris before sending your comments :-) Wearing my co-chair hat, let me emphasize that last bit. Our face-to-face meetings have the greatest value when move issues forwards, not review old stuff. So, please review this document now so that simple things can be fixed in the -01, and bigger issues on which there is disagreement can be flagged for more focused discussion. --Paul Hoffman, Director --VPN Consortium _______________________________________________ Mobike mailing list Mobike@machshav.com https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike From mobike-bounces@machshav.com Wed Jun 29 13:03:27 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DnfyA-0004Ey-Ho for mobike-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 13:03:27 -0400 Received: from machshav.com (machshav.com [147.28.0.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA11356 for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 13:03:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id BCC02FB289; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 13:03:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from machshav.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E72BEFB282; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 13:03:22 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: mobike@machshav.com Delivered-To: mobike@machshav.com Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 09151FB286; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 13:03:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from fridge.docomolabs-usa.com (key1.docomolabs-usa.com [216.98.102.225]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B473FB282 for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 13:03:21 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <083101c57ccc$a33a80a0$016115ac@dcml.docomolabsusa.com> From: "James Kempf" To: References: Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 10:04:40 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Mobike] BOF on Network Based Localized Mobility Management X-BeenThere: mobike@machshav.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile/Multihoming IKEv2 IETF list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Errors-To: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Phil Roberts and I are organizing a BOF on network based localized mobility management (netlmm) for IETF 63. The idea is to provide support in the local access network for mobility management so that a mobile node doesn't have to change its IP address so frequently. The BOF description is at: http://www.geocities.com/kempf42/netlmm-bof.txt There's a mailing list: netlmm@ngnet.it https://vesuvio.ipv6.cselt.it/mailman/listinfo/netlmm, to subscribe Currently, the list is being used by co-authors of the problem statement and requirements drafts, but please subscribe and join in discussion if you would like. Please don't respond to this message, since any discussion on the proposed BOF should be on the BOF list. The problem statement draft is available from the Internet Drafts repository: https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/idindex.cgi?command=id_detail&id=13248 The requirements draft is about complete and will be posted to the Internet Drafts repository by the end of the week. I'll send email to the list about it when its posted. Phil and I are working on a proposed WG charter, we'll post the charter to the list when its complete. jak _______________________________________________ Mobike mailing list Mobike@machshav.com https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike From mobike-bounces@machshav.com Wed Jun 29 15:50:10 2005 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DniZW-0001xx-EQ for mobike-archive@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:50:10 -0400 Received: from machshav.com (machshav.com [147.28.0.16]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA03691 for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:50:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 74A46FB289; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:50:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from machshav.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99CC2FB283; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:50:05 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: mobike@machshav.com Delivered-To: mobike@machshav.com Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 3BE8EFB284; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:50:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from newodin.ietf.org (unknown [132.151.6.50]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91705FB281 for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:50:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mlee by newodin.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1DniZN-0000eq-SM; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:50:01 -0400 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Message-Id: Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:50:01 -0400 Cc: mobike@machshav.com Subject: [Mobike] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-mobike-protocol-00.txt X-BeenThere: mobike@machshav.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Mobile/Multihoming IKEv2 IETF list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: mobike-bounces@machshav.com Errors-To: mobike-bounces@machshav.com --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the IKEv2 Mobility and Multihoming Working Group of the IETF. Title : IKEv2 Mobility and Multihoming Protocol (MOBIKE) Author(s) : P. Eronen Filename : draft-ietf-mobike-protocol-00.txt Pages : 21 Date : 2005-6-29 This document describes the MOBIKE protocol, a mobility and multihoming extension to IKEv2. The purpose of MOBIKE is to update the (outer) IP addresses associated with IKE and IPsec Security Associations (SAs). The main scenario for MOBIKE is making it possible for a remote access VPN user to move from one address to another without re-establishing all security associations with the VPN gateway. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mobike-protocol-00.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-mobike-protocol-00.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mobike-protocol-00.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2005-6-29121545.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mobike-protocol-00.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-mobike-protocol-00.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2005-6-29121545.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit _______________________________________________ Mobike mailing list Mobike@machshav.com https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike --NextPart--