Note Well

1
Note Well

• Any submission to the IETF intended by the
  Contributor for publication as all or part of an
  IETF Internet-Draft or RFC and any statement made
  within the context of an IETF activity is
  considered an IETF Contribution. Such
  statements include oral statements in IETF
  sessions, as well as written and electronic
  communications made at any time or place, which
  are addressed to
• the IETF plenary session,
• any IETF working group or portion thereof,
• the IESG, or any member thereof on behalf of the
  IESG,
• the IAB or any member thereof on behalf of the
  IAB,
• any IETF mailing list, including the IETF list
  itself, any working group or design team list, or
  any other list functioning under IETF auspices,
• the RFC Editor or the Internet-Drafts function
• All IETF Contributions are subject to the rules
  of RFC 3667 and RFC 3668. Statements made
  outside of an IETF session, mailing list or other
  function, that are clearly not intended to be
  input to an IETF activity, group or function, are
  not IETF Contributions in the context of this
  notice.
• Please consult RFC 3667 for details.

2
Mobile IPv4 (mip4) Agenda http//mip4.org/ietf61/

Henrik Levkowetz Pete McCannNovember 11, 2004
3
Agenda

• Preliminaries 10 min Chairs (http//mip4.org/ietf
  61/)
• Minute takers?
• Agenda bashing
• WG status web page update ( http//www.mip4.org/
  )
• Document Status 15 min Chairs
• draft-ietf-mip4-aaa-nai-03 RFC Published
• draft-ietf-mip4-aaa-key-06 RFC Ed Queue
• draft-ietf-mobileip-lowlatency-handoffs-v4-09
  AD Evaluation AD Followup
• draft-ietf-mip4-vpn-problem-statement-03
  Approved-announcement sent
• draft-ietf-mip4-rfc3012bis-02
  Almost ready to be sent to IESG
• draft-ietf-mobileip-reg-tunnel-09 Draft with
  new boilerplate, then IESG
• draft-ietf-mip4-dynamic-assignment-03
  Publication Requested
• draft-ietf-mip4-experimental-messages-02 RFC Ed
  Queue
• draft-ietf-mip4-rfc2006bis-01 Review needed
• draft-ietf-mobileip-vpn-problem-solution-03
  Co-editor needed, editing needed
• draft-ietf-mip4-rfc3344bis-01 ID exists
• draft-mip4-faerr-00.txt WG last call over, 1
  comment received

4
Agenda (cont)

• 3012bis 5 min Chairs
• summary of recent issues
• status and next steps.
• draft-ietf-mip4-rfc3012bis-02.txt
• VPN solution 5 min Chairs
• Co-editor for draft
• draft-ietf-mobileip-vpn-problem-solution-03.txt
• 3344bis 10 min Charlie Perkins
• Resolving outstanding issues and next steps
• Faerr document 5 min Chairs
• last call status
• Route Optimization 5 min Chairs
• Take up route optimization for MIPv4?
• IPv4/IPv6 transition 5 min Chairs
• Questions about MIPv4/MIPv6 - IPv4/IPv6
  transitions

5
3012bis

• Issue was raised with HMAC_CHAP_SPI
• Inner HMAC for compression would require a key
• No pre-shared key between MN and FA
• No way to carry this inside RADIUS
• RADIUS servers implement CHAP, not HMAC_CHAP
• Proposed Resolution
• Delete HMAC_CHAP_SPI from text
• It was added after security review suggested
  replacing MD5 with HMAC_MD5
• However, review was really talking about the main
  authentication extension, not the RADIUS
  compatibility text
• We have a disclaimer about the safety of this
  option in the Security Considerations

6
VPN Solution

• draft-ietf-mobileip-vpn-problem-solution-03.txt
• Sami Vaarala is the current editor
• Sami has agreed to continue, but doesnt have a
  lot of time
• A co-editor is needed
• Last IETF, some people offered to work on this
• Please see the chairs after the session so we can
  finalize this

7
3344bis

• Charlie Perkins

8
Foreign Agent Error

• Last Call ended Friday, Nov 5
• One comment received
• Positive support
• Length field correction
• What to do about unauthenticated FA error?
• What to do if FA receives RRP with FA error
  already appended?
• Discuss here, resolve on the list
• Do we have support to move forward?

9
Route Optimization

• Do we want to take this on?
• It was a major source of contention in IPv6!
• There is a not inconsiderable amount of work
  required to specify this as a general mechanism
  which will have acceptable security
• Who are the customers?
• What are the assumptions?
• Security model?

10
IPv4/IPv6 Transition

• A new mailing list has been created
• miptrans_at_ops.ietf.org
• Purpose discussion of IPv4/IPv6 transition
  questions related to Mobile IP
• To subscribe
• send subscribe miptrans in the body of an
  e-mail to majordomo_at_psg.com

11
IPv4/IPv6 Transition

• draft-larsson-v6ops-mip-scenarios-00
• Individual submission
• Will be submitted directly to the IESG for
  publication
• Attempts to define the field of possible
  combinations of IPv4/IPv6/MIP4/MIP6
• Getting acceptance for specific solutions has
  been difficult
• Comprehensive analysis like this needed first
• Analysis in draft may be basis for future work
• Comments welcome
• Please discuss on miptrans_at_ops.ietf.org

12
IPv4/IPv6 Transition

• Requirement for new MIP4 work items in this
  space
• A clear statement of the scenario / environment
  for which this is needed
• A clear statement of which of parts of the
  transition combinations will be addressed
• A definition of the problem, e.g. why does the
  work need to be done