Subject: [HOKEY] proposed wg document: draft-vidya-eap-er-02

From: Charles Clancy <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 20:08:08 -0500

HOKEY WG,

The chairs are requesting a consensus call on adoption of 
draft-vidya-eap-er-02 as a WG document to satisfy the following 
deliverables:

Feb 2007    First draft on EAP Re-authentication and Handover Keying
             Hierarchy
Mar 2007    First draft on EAP Re-authentication Protocol
Mar 2007    First draft on Protocol and Keying Hierarchy for Visited
             Domain Handovers and Re-authentication

Please respond to the list by March 5.

Bear in mind that this document would serve as a starting point for the 
main HOKEY re-authentication protocol development.  There is certainly 
still lively, ongoing discussion concerning certain key points of the 
protocol, but EAP-ER reflects much of the current consensus achieved 
both at the interim meeting, and subsequently on the list.  Many of the 
contentious points could be implemented as deltas to EAP-ER.

Proponents of alternate specific approaches are encouraged to author 
drafts concretely describing their ideas.  These by no means need to be 
complete protocol specifications, but they should at least, in a 
self-contained way, describe the contents of protocol exchanges and the 
fundamental assumptions on the lower layer protocols and security 
associations.  We can discuss these in Prague.  The -00 submission 
deadline is February 26, so if you can't meet that deadline, please 
inform the chairs so we can add it to the meeting agenda, and post your 
document to the list no later than March 12.

-- 
t. charles clancy, ph.d.  |  [email-masked]  |  www.cs.umd.edu/~clancy

_______________________________________________
HOKEY mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hokey

---

From: Madjid Nakhjiri <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 15:51:30 -0800

Hi Chairs,

As I pointed once prior to Interim, I have a solution draft. Various
versions of the draft has been presented in various IETF venues. The draft
discusses a complete key hierarchy down to base station level. The draft has
been commented on in various occasions on the predecessors of this ML. 
There seems to be other solutions posted to the list as well, none of which
have been discussed on the list.

While there are multiple documents present, each including valuable elements
required for the solution, I am not sure what the reason for adopting one
and turning everything else into a delta is? 

Furthermore, I don't see any specific reason to adopt 802.11r terminology
for IETF, given the level of instability in the connotations perceived with
802.11r elements and that is another issue I see with the Vidya-eap-er
draft.

With all due respect to the chairs and the good work of the authors of the
draft, I am "e-humming" against the adoption of this draft as base line and
request that we start a design process that adequately and fairly puts
forward the views of proposals according to the requirements stated in the
_merged_ problem statement (which btw, was a merged version of two existing
PS drafts itself)

If meeting timelines is the issue, I will support the chairs quest to push
back the deadlines..

R,

Madjid

-----Original Message-----
From: Charles Clancy [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 5:08 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [HOKEY] proposed wg document: draft-vidya-eap-er-02

HOKEY WG,

---

From: Charles Clancy <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 21:12:26 -0500

Madjid,

The "merging" process for a large document is generally more difficult 
to manage and takes more time to complete than adoption of a single 
draft to which changes are then made.  The chairs feel there has been 
ample time to discuss abstract ideas, and would like to make tangible 
progress by moving the discussion concrete protocol descriptions.  It's 
easier to do that with a document in place that provides context for 
describing these protocols.

We fully expect significant changes to EAP-ER, if it is adopted, to 
include editorship, terminology, and protocols.  One significant feature 
of the current EAP-ER draft is it that it already captures the protocol 
transport consensus from the interim meeting.