Subject: [mobile-ip] Mobile IPv4 Authentication Internt Draft revision 0.1

From: "junhyuk song" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 10:13:30 +0900

Hi All,

We recently submitted the revision of Internet draft draft on "MIPv4 Authentication Shared Secret Generation.

draft-song-mobileip-mipv4-auth-secgeneration-01.txt  

Regards,
JH SONG

---

From: Dan Harkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 11:21:23 -0700

specification on how to derive a key has just one.

  Dan.

On Thu, 05 Jul 2001 10:13:30 +0900 [email-masked] wrote
> 
>          MN-HA shared key = HMAC-MD5(MN-AAA-key | FA Challenge |
> 	                               MN NAI | MN-AAA-key)
>

---

From: Munna Pavitra <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 13:33:50 -0500 (CDT)

On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, Dan Harkins wrote:

When do we expect to start the work ?

---

From: Munna <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 13:39:52 -0500 (CDT)

> specification on how to derive a key has just one.

Sorry for the last weird mail I sent. But at least I found a way to post
my message, because the last two emails I sent did not appear on the list
at all...

I have done everything possible to unsubscribe this email address of mine
from this list. But nothing works. "Unsubscribe" command does not work.
The administrator does not reply. Any ideas ?

Thanks.

---

From: Dan Harkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 12:24:35 -0700

It appears my last message got chopped by the list and didn't make 
sense. What I was saying is that HMAC-MD5 takes two parameters but
the specification of how to derive a key in the referenced I-D has
only one.

  And it would be nice to know the rationale for using the MN-AAA-key
twice in the derivation.

  thanks,

  Dan.

On Thu, 05 Jul 2001 11:21:23 PDT you wrote

---

From: "junhyuk song" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2001 22:35:16 +0900

Sorry, it is typo.
It is MD5. Our Internet Draft support MD5 as a default configuration.
And AAA depends on  Algorithm Identifier in MN-AAA authentication extention.
The default SPI is CHAP_SPI.
I will add this on upcoming revision.

---

From: Pat Calhoun <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 08:01:56 -0700

>   And it would be nice to know the rationale for using the MN-AAA-key

Basically, the authors are trying to mimic the prefix+suffix use of MD5
in RFC 2002. What they seem to have missed here is that HMAC-MD5 is 
sufficiently cryptographically strong that suffix+prefix is unnecessary.

I believe that they meant to concatenate the data into a single string.

PatC