Subject: [mobile-ip] FW: Seeking consensus on a MIP6 charter item

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 16:37:40 -0500

Note: Please send all responses to [email-masked]

-----Original Message-----
From: Patil Basavaraj (NET/Dallas) 
Sent: 04 September, 2003 03:05 PM
To: [email-masked]'
Subject: Seeking consensus on a MIP6 charter item

Hello,

The following is a milestone identified in the current charter for
Mobile IPv6:

 o Mar 04 Submit alternate security mechanisms for HA-MN to IESG

However there is no corresponding text describing what this milestone
really means in the charter. My view of the above milestone is as
follows:
   Currently IPsec provides the means for authenticating a MN to the
   HA. This mandates the existence of an IPsec SA between the MN and
   HA. It is possible that an equivalent degree of security for the
   BU/BAck can be achieved by encapsulating an authenticator in a
   Binding data suboption. This basically falls back to the Mobile
   IPv4 model of authentication between MN-HA where the MN-HA auth
   extension is sufficient to create the binding in the HA. With this
   approach there is no reason to implement IPsec/IKE(v2) in a MIPv6
   MN, which I think is an overkill for basically doing authentication
   between two entities that are aware of each other. 

So the question is:
1. Should the Mobile IPv6 WG take on the work item mentioned in the
   milestone above? 

A: 
   Yes  [ ]
   No   [ ]

Reason: 

Note that if there is consensus to work on this, the above text or
some equivalent would be added to the charter.

Please express your views on this by Sept 12th, 2003.

-Basavaraj