Subject: mboned: WGLC for draft-ietf-mboned-maccnt-req-02.txt

From: David Meyer <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 21:46:36 -0800

Folks

	This note starts the WG Last Call for comments on
	draft-ietf-mboned-maccnt-req-02.txt, "Requirements for
	Accounting, Authentication and Authorization in Well
	Managed IP Multicasting Services".  It can be found on  
	
	http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mboned-maccnt-req-02.txt

	The document's proposed status is Informational.

	Please review the document carefully, and send your
	feedback to the list.  Please also indicate whether or
	not you believe that this document is ready to go to the
	IESG. 

	This Last Call will end on 29 Dec 2005 at 1400 PDT (UTC/GMT-7).

	Thanks,

	Dave

---

From: Marshall Eubanks <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2005 13:38:16 -0500

Hello;

I read through this document thoroughly. It is very well written,  
free of errors as far as I can tell
(I have one comment and one nit), and gives a very complete  
description of the requirements around multicast AAA in a business  
environment.

I fully believe this document is ready to go to the IETF.

Comment : In the Introduction it says,

      This I-D will present general functional requirements related to
      accounting, authentication and authorization issues in IP
      multicasting networks, and a multicast network which fulfills  
these
      requirements will be called a "well managed" IP multicasting
      network.

But it is clear that not all situations will need everything in this  
document. This is mentioned towards
the end on page 13

      Another application example is the case where the content provider
      (CP) and network service provider (NSP) are the same entity
      (company) as shown in Fig. 3.  In the case that the CP and NSP are
      the same entity, some of the requirements indicated in 4.1 are not
      required.

but also, in some cases NSP's and CP's may decide that they do not  
need or want certain requirements - for example, a multicast video  
system at a University, such as the U. of Wisconsin DATN

http://datn.wisc.edu/about/ , may feel that in a University  
environment there is no  need to implement
DRM related authentication, or that authentication might be better  
done using existing protocols.

The point I would like to make is that calling these systems not  
"well managed" because they chose to forgo
or do not need certain aspects of the complete AAA system is likely  
not to be well received.

I would suggest that the author's consider either changing the term  
("Fully AAA Enabled" would be more accurate)
or allow for partial implementations to be considered "Well Managed".

Nit : On Page 10 :

Another contract is between the CP and end
      user to permit the user to subscribe multicast content.

s/to subscribe/to subscribe to/

Regards
Marshall Eubanks

> 	This Last Call will end on 29 Dec 2005 at 1400 PDT (UTC/GMT-7).

_______________________________________________________________
user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/mboned.html
web archive:  http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/mboned/