Subject: [Pana] closing issue 229

From: "Tschofenig, Hannes" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 01:14:20 +0100

hi yoshi, 

http://danforsberg.info:8080/pana-issues/issue229
> 
> > 
> > >or an identifier that is not carried in data
> > >   packets but has local significance in identifying a connected
device
> > >   (e.g., circuit id, PPP interface id).  The last type of
identifiers
> > >   are commonly used in point-to-point links where MAC addresses
are
> > not
> > >   available and lower-layers are already physically or
> > >   cryptographically secured.
> > >  
> > >
> > PPPoE and L2TP use an identifier for a PPP session that is carried
in 
> > the header itself, and have nothing to do with physical or
cryptographic
> 
> [hannes] i think that this issue will be resolved once we use two
different 
> terms for layer-two addresses and for security mechanisms. 
> 
> > 
> > security.
> 
> We will revise the text to include the PPPoE/L2TP cases.
> 
> [hannes] what text do you have in mind? 

Something like:

"
   The device identifier used in the context of PANA can be an IP
   address, a MAC address, or an identifier that is not carried in data
   packets but has local significance in identifying a connected device
   (e.g., circuit id, PPP interface id).  The last type of identifiers
   are commonly used in point-to-point links where MAC addresses are not
   available and lower-layers are already physically or
   cryptographically secured.  Identifiers that are not related to
   physical or cryptographic security (e.g., session identifiers in
   PPP tunneling protocols) are not used as device identifiers.
"

[hannes] sounds good to me. 
i think that this was the last aspect of issue 229.

ciao
hannes

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