| RE: Strawman -10/EMSK deletion requirement? | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
|
From: Avi Lior (avi |
|
| Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 07:38:21 -0800 (PST) | |
Jari, See inline. > -----Original Message----- > From: Jari Arkko [mailto:jari.arkko [at] piuha.net] > Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 3:34 AM > To: Avi Lior > Cc: Salowey, Joe; Narayanan, Vidya; eap [at] frascone.com > Subject: Re: [eap] Strawman -10/EMSK deletion requirement? > > Avi Lior wrote: > > >>[Joe] I think a AAA server is typically composed of several > >>components. > >>One of these can be a key holder. I don't see why you > couldn't define > >>new functionality in RADIUS to interact with the key holder (other > >>than the fact that it seems to be difficult to define > anything new in > >>RADIUS). > >> > >> > > > >[Avi] Aboslutely correct on all fronts ;-). A AAA server can have > >EAP-AS (authetncation server) and a key holder/key generator. So I > >guess ia m being very formal in the sense that AAA is a protocol and > >not a server. > > > >And BTW I don't think we need to have an RFC to define a Key Holder > >function in RADIUS servers. > > > > > First of all, I think this part of the discussion is largely > just a matter of vague definitions making it hard to make > exact statements. E.g. where is the line between AAA as a > "transport" and as an "application" that has intelligence to > make decisions and grant resources such as keys? That line is tough to define in RADIUS, is defined in Diameter. And I think it we don't need to enter the rat hole and formally define it. > Just to repeat what we have already established, I think we > have consensus that (a) EMSK is generated by EAP methods and > that (b) its not going to be shipped away to the access > devices. In addition, it seems obvious that the document we > are discussing will not define how AMSKs are used or transported. Okay with me. > So the conclusion is that the EMSK is kept somewhere between > the EAP method and AAA transport layers. Yes. > I would note that this means that it is, in an IETF sense, > within a box and not transported via protocols. I don't think > it makes a lot of sense to debate too long about what the > internal structure of the box is. I'd be happy saying that it > resides in the EAP server. I would in addition only say the > following about the internal module structures: The EMSK is > not communicated either to the lower layer or the AAA transport layer. > But AMSKs derived from it can be, > and that any such derivation would have to be defined in > future documents. Yes. > Finally, I dislike the idea that we would be adding major > functionality (such as key server) to IETF protocols and > mechanisms without properly documenting how they will be used > and what the protocols will exactly carry. Understood. > The role of the > EAP keying framework is to leave some key material in the EAP > server to enable such functionality, but if we are going to > use it, we will need, among other things, protocol > descriptions on how RADIUS can retrieve pieces of this key > information and how particular applications employ these keys. If RADIUS is colocated with EAP-server do we need to define a protocol for getting the AMSK(s)? > --Jari > >
- Re: Strawman -10/EMSK deletion requirement?, (continued)
- Re: Strawman -10/EMSK deletion requirement? Rafa Marin Lopez, March 14 2006
- RE: Strawman -10/EMSK deletion requirement? Salowey, Joe, March 9 2006
- RE: Strawman -10/EMSK deletion requirement? Avi Lior, March 9 2006
- RE: Strawman -10/EMSK deletion requirement? Avi Lior, March 10 2006
- RE: Strawman -10/EMSK deletion requirement? Avi Lior, March 10 2006
- Re: Strawman -10/EMSK deletion requirement? Jari Arkko, March 12 2006
-
RE: Strawman -10/EMSK deletion requirement? Avi Lior, March 10 2006
- Re: Strawman -10/EMSK deletion requirement? Rafa Marin Lopez, March 13 2006
- Re: Strawman -10/EMSK deletion requirement? Yoshihiro Ohba, March 14 2006
Results generated by Tiger Technologies using MHonArc.