Subject: [netlmm] Reminder: WGLC for Security Threats Document

From: Christian Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 10:17:47 +0200

Hello folks,

this is to remind everybody that the 2nd WGLC for the Security Threats
to Network-Based Localized Mobility Management document ends tonight.

You can find the document at:

  http://doc.tm.uka.de/2006/draft-ietf-netlmm-threats-04.txt

A diff between version 03 and 04 of the document is available at:

  http://doc.tm.uka.de/2006/draft-ietf-netlmm-threats-03to04.html

Kind regards,
- Christian

-- 
Christian Vogt, Institute of Telematics, Universitaet Karlsruhe (TH)
www.tm.uka.de/~chvogt/pubkey/

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

---

From: Alexandru Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 12:32:42 +0200

Christian Vogt wrote:
> Hello folks,
> 
> this is to remind everybody that the 2nd WGLC for the Security 
> Threats to Network-Based Localized Mobility Management document ends
>  tonight.
> 
> Kind regards, - Christian
> 

Hi Christian, to my reading there seem to be a certain amount of overlap
and inconsistency between this document and the Security Considerations
section of draft-giaretta-netlmm-dt-protocol-00.txt.  For example, the
DT document describes LMA-MAG threats that are also described in the
netlmm-threats document.  The DT document refers to netlmm-threats only
about MN-AR interface, or the netlmm-threats document describes mostly
LMA-MAG threats.

Otherwise this document gives a good idea about what the risks of
using a localized mobility management kind of protocol can become, in
general, somehow related to the netlmm protocol.

Alex

---

From: Christian Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 12:46:09 +0200

Hi Alex,

thanks for the review!

> Hi Christian, to my reading there seem to be a certain amount of
> overlap and inconsistency between this document and the Security
> Considerations section of draft-giaretta-netlmm-dt-protocol-00.txt.
> For example, the DT document describes LMA-MAG threats that are also
> described in the netlmm-threats document.  The DT document refers to
> netlmm-threats only about MN-AR interface, or the netlmm-threats
> document describes mostly LMA-MAG threats.

Earlier versions of the Threats document discussed only the MN-MAG
interface, and it was later decided that the document should also
consider the MAG-LMA interface.  This is IMO the reason why the current
DT Protocol document refers to the Threats document only with regard to
threats to the MN-MAG interface, but has its own discussion for the
MAG-LMA interface.

I would ask DT Protocol document authors to refer to the Threats
document also for potential vulnerabilities on the MAG-LMA interface in
later document versions.  This would help to avoid redundancies and
potential inconsistencies.

>  general, somehow related to the netlmm protocol.

Ok, thanks!

- Christian