Subject: Re: [MBONED] Adopting <draft-sarikaya-mboned-mldauth-ps-00.txt> as a WG doc

From: Behcet Sarikaya <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2007 10:48:44 -0700 (PDT)

----- Original Message ----
From: Hitoshi Asaeda <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2007 5:19:00 AM
Subject: Re: [MBONED] Adopting <draft-sarikaya-mboned-mldauth-ps-00.txt> as a WG doc

> In the last session of mboned during IETF-69 in Chicago, the 
> meeting agreed to adopt 
> <draft-sarikaya-mboned-mldauth-ps-00.txt> as a WG document.  
> We would like to confirm this on the ML as well.
> 
> If you have any comments or objections, please post 
> them on the ML by the end of the next week (i.e., by Sept. 14).

I have taken a quick read of this document.

The topic is interesting, but as the authors mentioned in the draft,
this draft is very specific to AAA requirements for mobile users. It
is not a problem statement document of the MLD protocol itself. The
draft title does not correspond to the contents and hence should be
changed.

[behcet] OK, we can revise the draft in view of this comment.

Moreover, IMO, the suitable working group in which this document is
discussed is MULTIMOB group, because the contents is related to the
topics discussed in mobile related groups (especially in multimob).

[behcet]  Multimob is currently going for a BOF in Vancouver, so it is not even a WG. Maybe in the future for developing a solution, Multimob could become a good place.

Regards,

Behcet

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

---

From: JW Atwood <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2007 14:47:41 -0400

As we described in the last mboned wg meeting (no I-D yet, but see the 
slides at
http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/07jul/slides/mboned-11.pdf )

the problem of user identification of multicast clients is there for 
IPv4 (IGMP).  Draft-sarikaya identifies the problem for IPv6.  It is a 
multicast problem, not a (specifically) mobility problem, although 
draft-sarikaya uses the context of coming mobile applications to 
motivate it.

We believe that mboned is the right place to address the problem of 
(multicast) user authentication, authorization and accounting, for both 
IPv4 and IPv6.

  Bill Atwood & Salekul Islam

Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
> Subject: Re: [MBONED] Adopting 
> <draft-sarikaya-mboned-mldauth-ps-00.txt> as a WG doc
>
> [behcet]  Multimob is currently going for a BOF in Vancouver, so it is 
> not even a WG. Maybe in the future for developing a solution, Multimob 
> could become a good place.
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Behcet
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

-- 

Dr. J.W. Atwood, Eng.             tel:   +1 (514) 848-2424 x3046
Professor Emeritus                fax:   +1 (514) 848-2830
Department of Computer Science
   and Software Engineering
Concordia University EV 3.185     email: [email-masked]
1455 de Maisonneuve Blvd. West    http: //users.encs.concordia.ca/~bill
Montreal, Quebec Canada H3G 1M8

---

From: JW Atwood <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2007 14:47:41 -0400

--

---

From: Hitoshi Asaeda <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 12:02:47 +0900 (JST)

> (multicast) user authentication, authorization and accounting, for both 

Yes, the multicast AAA is currently covered in the mboned WG and
needed stuff, and discussing the problem statements, requirements, and
solution related to this issue is needed. However, if the PS or
requirements depends on some specific environment, submitting the
draft to a suitable WG may give more comments. This is the comment for
draft-sarikaya.

On the other hand, several igmp/mld security I-Ds were previously
proposed in IRTF gsec WG, msec WG, and mboned WG. I think there were
interesting ideas in their proposals, while the activities seemd to be
diminished now (because of non-chartered item?).
Therefore it seems it is a litte early to define the mboned WG draft
for igmp/mld security stuff. It would be done after revising the
mboned charter, saying mboned is officially focusing on the igmp/mld
security stuff, and the various efficient solutions would be
discussed, and selected or integrated in mboned.

Regards,
--
Hitoshi Asaeda

---

From: Hitoshi Asaeda <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 12:02:47 +0900 (JST)

Regards,
--
Hitoshi Asaeda

---

From: "Alvaro Fernandez" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 20:04:00 +0200

Hitoshi:
 
I would like to read the previous drafts related with multicast AAA but sometimes the name of the drafts are not very clear and don't correlate with the content.
 
If you have any short list it will be very helpful for me and  probably for other people in this group interested in multicast AAA
 
Thanks and regards
Alvaro

________________________________

De: Hitoshi Asaeda [mailto:[email-masked]]
Enviado el: lun 17/09/2007 5:02
Para: [email-masked]
Asunto: Re: [MBONED] Adopting <draft-sarikaya-mboned-mldauth-ps-00.txt> asa WG doc

Regards,
--
Hitoshi Asaeda

---

From: "Alvaro Fernandez" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 20:04:00 +0200

Hitoshi:

 
Thanks and regards
Alvaro

Regards,
--
Hitoshi Asaeda

---

From: Hitoshi Asaeda <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 13:41:05 +0900 (JST)

> I would like to read the previous drafts related with multicast AAA
>  but sometimes the name of the drafts are not very clear and don't
>  correlate with the content.
>  
> If you have any short list it will be very helpful for me and
>  probably for other people in this group interested in multicast AAA

No, I've said;
    "multicast AAA is needed stuff (and the corresponding draft is
     proposed in the current mboned). But if a draft focuses on some
     specific situation (e.g. mobile communication environment), it's
     good to submit the draft to the corresponding groups (e.g.
     multimob) to get more comments."
and
    "igmp/mld security has been discussed previously. But these drafts
     are obsolete or diminished because of non-chartered item (I
     guess). Therefore it may be good to clearly charter the item in
     the mboned (or magma?) to focus on the topic before mboned
     decides the official WG draft. (Then we may have more interesting
     comments and efficient solutions towards the goal.)"

Regarding the previous discussion about igmp/mld security, you may
want to read the following slides for instance;

http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/04aug/slides/magma-4.pdf
http://www.securemulticast.org/GSEC/gsec3_ietf53_SecureIGMP1.pdf
http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/02nov/slides/magma-2.pdf
--
Hitoshi Asaeda

---

From: Hitoshi Asaeda <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 13:41:05 +0900 (JST)

No, I've said;