Subject: [Pana] NEW: [issue63] MAC AVP a SHOULD or a MUST

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 09:09:25 +0200

New submission from Dan Forsberg <[email-masked]>:

inherited from the previous (re-)authentication.  For any EAP-based
   re-authentication, if there is an established PANA SA,
   PANA-Auth-Request and PANA-Auth-Answer messages SHOULD be protected
   by adding a MAC AVP to each message.

JARI: (Technical) How about a MUST? Otherwise, implementations have
      to deal with the MAC either being present or not present. And there
      has to be a config switch to either allow or disallow this.

----------
category: Technical
document: draft-ietf-pana-pana-xx.txt
messages: 205
nosy: dforsber
priority: Must Fix
status: Clarifying Text Required
title: MAC AVP a SHOULD or a MUST
__________________________________________________
PANA Issues <[email-masked]>
<http://danforsberg.info:8080/pana-issues/issue63>
__________________________________________________
ڝ���X��X����j'�~����i����
bz���j)fj��b��?���

---

From: Alper Yegin <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 12:08:31 -0800

>     has to be a config switch to either allow or disallow this.

I think MUST is better.

Alper

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

---

From: Alper Yegin <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 12:08:31 -0800

I think MUST is better.

Alper