Subject: Re: New version of draft-ietf-send-psreq to be posted

From: [email-masked] (Parijat)
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 01:41:34 +0800

On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 08:16:01PM +0200, Pekka Savola wrote:
>  1) is there a need to clarify the stance wrt. the use of encryption
> somehow?
> 

I don't know if encryption is supposed to imply authentication here,
but...

Section 3.0:

	1. A model where all authenticated nodes trust each other.

I am confused as to what "authenticated" means.  Perhaps this means that
ND/RD packets are protected by AH?  But that can't be, since SEND is
about solving the bootstrapping problems wrt ND.

I have not read [MAN-SA] yet.  If this issue is addressed there, do
ignore me.

-- 
Sincerely,
Parijat Mishra
R & D Engineer,
Institute for Communications Research
Tel: (65)68709353
--------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, send email with "UNSUBSCRIBE" in the
body to <[email-masked]>.
Archive: http://standards.ericsson.net/lists/ietf-send/maillist.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Bill Sommerfeld <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 13:30:48 -0500

> ND/RD packets are protected by AH?  

this hasn't been specified yet.

> But that can't be, since SEND is about solving the bootstrapping
> problems wrt ND.

this doesn't actually follow; a public-key based self-authenticating
AH may well be the solution.

> I have not read [MAN-SA] yet.  If this issue is addressed there, do

this is a requirements document.  it does not discuss mechanisms in
detail.  we plan to come up with some way to authenticate ND/RD
packets but that won't be part of this document.

					- Bill