Subject: Refocusing/simplifying pana-framework [was Re: [Pana] IETF LC and discussion: Next steps]

From: Yoshihiro Ohba <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 14:14:38 -0400

> 
> [7] Can we refocus and simplify the PANA framework document? For example, we
> can highlight the network access authentication aspect, and dim others (such
> as network selection, secure association, etc.). Also, we can remove section
> 10 (DSL and WiFi deployments). 
> 

Looking at the recent IETF mailing list discussion, focusing on
authentication aspect seems necessary for broader acceptance of the
PANA framework draft.

- Network selection section (Section 8) should be removed if NAP and
ISP separate authentication is removed from the base specification.

- Data traffic protection section (Section 6) can be removed because
Section 4 also has brief text on enabling per-packet ciphering.

- IP address configuration section (Section 5) should be described in
the base specification because it contains several MUST/SHOULD.

- I agree to remove Section 10.  Some of the contents of Section 10
can be described in separate documents such as pana-ipsec and
pana-ieee80211doti.

Regards,
Yoshihiro Ohba

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

---

From: Rafa Marin Lopez <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 11:54:06 -0400

Hi Yoshi,

I have been checking your proposed changes with the current text of PANA
fwk.

I agree with all of them. A minor comment below.

>can be described in separate documents such as pana-ipsec and
I was wondering if a PANA-DSL scenario should be described also in a
separated document because that is also included in section 10.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------
Rafael Marin Lopez
Faculty of Computer Science-University of Murcia
30071 Murcia - Spain
Telf: +34968367645    e-mail: [email-masked]
------------------------------------------------------

---

From: "Alper Yegin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 15:42:27 -0700

> the base specification because it contains several MUST/SHOULD.

I've looked at the text again. I think we can remove all MUST/SHOULDs. The
original intent of that text was to be informational -- showing the
different ways IP addresses can be configured in relation to PANA.

I don't think we need that text be in the base specification.

I'm inclined to keep the text in the PANA framework after stripping off the
MUST/SHOULDs.

Alper