Subject: [HOKEY] call for editors for key delivery document

From: Charles Clancy <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 01 May 2007 17:45:14 -0400

The plan document divides the HOKEY re-auth protocol into two documents, 
one defining the re-auth protocol, and another generic protocol for 
delivering USRK/DSRK/DSUSRKs.  Any volunteers to edit such a document? 
Please respond by May 10.

-- 
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: "Julien Bournelle" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2007 00:02:47 +0200

Hi charles,

 just a clarification question

> delivering USRK/DSRK/DSUSRKs.  Any volunteers to edit such a document?

 what do you mean by "generic protocol for delivering USRK/DSRK/DSUSRKs" ?

 Will it be a completely new protocol or are we going to use a
AAA-based protocol
 for this ?

 Regards,

 Julien

---

From: Charles Clancy <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 01 May 2007 18:04:49 -0400

It's defined in the plan document.  The document wouldn't define a 
transport.  It's just messages that could be carried by any transport. 
For HOKEY, they'd be transported within EAP payloads.  Another service 
could transport them over AAA directly, or however else it wanted.

---

From: "Charles Clancy" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 02:17:42 -0400 (EDT)

HOKEY WG,

Madjid and Yoshi will be co-editors for the key delivery document.

We need to get started on the text.  Madjid and Yoshi, can you try and get
a basic outline put together, perhaps grafting in some of the
EAP-ER-Bootstraip text?

There seemed to be vague support for the protocol ideas presented in the
plan document, and some specific concerns about key wrapping and security
associations.  Do the proponents of alternate protocols have any specific
ideas of what they think should be included?

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