headers
Jari Arkko | 1 Sep 2006 17:34

new mipshop co-chair


I am pleased to announce that Vijay Devarapalli has
been selected as a new co-chair for MIPSHOP. He will
work with Stefano Faccin, who remains as the other
co-chair. Gabriel Montenegro is stepping down.

Thank you Vijay for taking on this task -- the group
will be in good hands! And thanks again Gabriel
for your work in MIPSHOP and taking the group
to a successful completion in its first round of
existence.

--Jari
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Rahman, Akbar | 6 Sep 2006 21:56

What is the status of the MIH Problem Statement

Hi Eleanor,

Can you update me on the status of the MIH problem statement updates?
If I remember correctly, Stefano had given a target date of end of
August for it to be out to the mailing list.

Thanks.

Akbar

-----Original Message-----
From: Hepworth, Eleanor [mailto:eleanor.hepworth <at> roke.co.uk] 
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 6:08 AM
To: Sam Xia; mipshop <at> ietf.org
Cc: stefano.faccin <at> intel.com; Rahman, Akbar;
srinivas.sreemanthula <at> nokia.com; yohba <at> tari.toshiba.com
Subject: RE: Mipshop Digest, Vol 28, Issue 10

Hi,

We have recently been discussing how to combine the NIHO problem
statement and the MIH problem statements, and we're currently thinking
about how to structure the merged draft.  I believe Telemarco will be
sending out an e-mail about this to the list shortly.  Hopefully that
structure will provide a placeholder for things like the AR-INFO
requirements discussion.

Thanks,

Ele
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Giaretta Gerardo | 7 Sep 2006 12:07
Picon
Favicon

RE: RE: Review of draft-yegin-hmip-sa-00

Hi Alper,
 
sorry for the very late answer. Please find below the email that Sam sent during the IESG discussion of the MIP6 bootstrapping PS.
You can find other views on this topic also in the notes of ICOS BoF (IETF #62).
 
--Gerardo
 
>
> ------ Forwarded Message
> > From: ext Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf <at> mit.edu>
> > Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 16:03:22 -0500
> > To: < iesg <at> ietf.org>
> > Cc: <basavaraj.patil <at> nokia.com>, <gdommety <at> cisco.com>
> > Subject: DISCUSS and COMMENT: draft-ietf-mip6-bootstrap-ps
> >
> > Discuss:
> > First, thanks for a good job on a well written problem
> statement.  My
> > concerns here are concernes about the document but can be
> interpreted
> > as early warnings about the direction the WG seems to be taking.
> > Addressing the concerns against the document can probably
> be done very
> > simply, but it is important to discuss the working group's direction
> > now to make sure that you will not end up with a discuss challenging
> > something fundamental about your solution when it comes to the IESG.
> >
> > In section 7.2 you discuss using the authentication to both set up
> > network access and mobility access.  I don't think this is
> compatible
> > with how the EAP working group and security area invision EAP being
> > used. For example the key management framework requires
> that all keys
> > based on the EMSK be generated at the beginning of the
> exchange. We've
> > explicitly resisted several attempts to use EAP keying information
> > used to set up network access to later generate keys for other
> > purposes.  Both mobility and network access are at least valid EAP
> > applications.  I recommend that you note that the question
> of whether
> > this authentication can be reused is open in your document.  I
> > recommend that you get together with Russ Housley, Jari,
> myself and the EAP
> > community and decide whether this use is OK before designing a
> > solution that assumes you will be able to do this.
> >
> > I'm assuming that this problem statement is for a standards track
> > solution.  As such, I don't think considering RFC 4285 is
> appropriate.
> > In particular I don't think it makes sense for us to base standards
> > trackrequirements on a protocol we were unwilling to
> standardize.  It
> > feels too much like using the informational RFC series as a
> mechanism
> > for doing ongoing standards work without meeting our
> requirements for
> > review.  If the working group believes that something like
> RFC 4285 is
> > needed, then the working group should commit to doing the necessary
> > work to make a standard in this space: write a service model for
> > Mobile IP security and then write both the authentication
> protocol and
> > the IPsec security solution as architectural blocks that fit that
> > model.  If the working group does not want to do this work, then RFC
> > 4285-like solutions need not influence requirements here.
> >
> > Comment:
> > The claim in section 5.2.1 that use of certificates would require
> > deploying a PKI is false.  I do agree that certificates do not align
> > well with AAA. I'd recommend rewording as "Certificates are
> not easily
> > supported by traditional AAA infrastructures."
> >
>
> ------ End of Forwarded Message

From: Alper Yegin [mailto:alper.yegin <at> yegin.org]
Sent: martedì 22 agosto 2006 20.10
To: Giaretta Gerardo
Cc: mipshop <at> ietf.org; 'Lakshminath Dondeti'
Subject: RE: [Mipshop] RE: Review of draft-yegin-hmip-sa-00

Gerardo,

 

Can you point out the e-mail where Sam has raised the issue? I'd like to fully understand the context first.

 

Alper

 

 

From: Giaretta Gerardo [mailto:gerardo.giaretta <at> telecomitalia.it]
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 6:46 PM
To: Alper Yegin
Cc: mipshop <at> ietf.org; Lakshminath Dondeti
Subject: RE: [Mipshop] RE: Review of draft-yegin-hmip-sa-00

 

Hi Alper,

plerase find below one question about the approach suggested by the draft.

> > I don't think the NAS should be involved in the
> > key delivery.  My (limited) understanding of 4140
> > tells me that the MAP is deeper in the network
> > than a typical NAS
>
> In my understanding, MAP is part of the "access network", not
> the "home
> network." For that, putting aside the physical and
> topological aspects, from
> "administrative domain" aspect NAS and MAP are the part of
> the same network.
>
> > I am fine with the notion of using a key from the
> > EAP keying hierarchy for IKEv2
> > authentication.  However, I don't think we should
> > use the MSK for the key derivation.  Instead a
> > key from the EMSK hierarchy might be used.   We
> > can discuss the specifics in detail if you want.
>
> Why do you think so?
>

As you know, there were some proposals for MIP6 bootstrapping similar to this, deriving keys from network access authentication for MIPv6 bootstrapping. These proposals have not been accepted because there were strong suggestions to keep authentication procedures for network access services and mobility services separate. In his review of the MIP6 bootstrapping PS document, Sam mentioned again that these two authentications must be fully separated.

Since I originally proposed this approach for MIP6, I am wondering why you think this should be acceptable for HMIP. Is there any real difference in the scenario in your opinion?

--Gerardo

> We proposed use of MSK because we assume MAP and NAS are part
> of the same
> administrative domain. NAS can generate the HMIP-SA and pass
> it to the MAP.
> Use of EMSK would have been more appropriate if MAP were part
> of the home
> network along with the HAAA server.
>
> Alper
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mipshop mailing list
> Mipshop <at> ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop
>

--------------------------------------------------------------------
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This message and its attachments are addressed solely to the persons
above and may contain confidential information. If you have received
the message in error, be informed that any use of the content hereof
is prohibited. Please return it immediately to the sender and delete
the message. Should you have any questions, please contact us by
replying to webmaster <at> telecomitalia.it.
        Thank you
                                        www.telecomitalia.it
--------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This message and its attachments are addressed solely to the persons
above and may contain confidential information. If you have received
the message in error, be informed that any use of the content hereof
is prohibited. Please return it immediately to the sender and delete
the message. Should you have any questions, please contact us by
replying to webmaster <at> telecomitalia.it.
        Thank you
                                        www.telecomitalia.it
--------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Mipshop mailing list
Mipshop <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Hepworth, Eleanor | 8 Sep 2006 11:48
Picon

RE: What is the status of the MIH Problem Statement

Hi Akbar,

The updates to the draft are just being finalised, and there should be a
version available by the middle of next week.

Thanks

Ele

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rahman, Akbar [mailto:Akbar.Rahman <at> InterDigital.com] 
> Sent: 06 September 2006 20:56
> To: Hepworth, Eleanor
> Cc: mipshop <at> ietf.org
> Subject: What is the status of the MIH Problem Statement
> 
> 
> Hi Eleanor,
> 
> 
> Can you update me on the status of the MIH problem statement 
> updates? If I remember correctly, Stefano had given a target 
> date of end of August for it to be out to the mailing list.
> 
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> 
> Akbar
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hepworth, Eleanor [mailto:eleanor.hepworth <at> roke.co.uk] 
> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 6:08 AM
> To: Sam Xia; mipshop <at> ietf.org
> Cc: stefano.faccin <at> intel.com; Rahman, Akbar; 
> srinivas.sreemanthula <at> nokia.com; yohba <at> tari.toshiba.com
> Subject: RE: Mipshop Digest, Vol 28, Issue 10
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> We have recently been discussing how to combine the NIHO 
> problem statement and the MIH problem statements, and we're 
> currently thinking about how to structure the merged draft.  
> I believe Telemarco will be sending out an e-mail about this 
> to the list shortly.  Hopefully that structure will provide a 
> placeholder for things like the AR-INFO requirements discussion.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Ele
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Sam Xia [mailto:xiazhongqi <at> huawei.com]
> > Sent: 07 August 2006 02:52
> > To: mipshop <at> ietf.org
> > Cc: Hepworth, Eleanor; stefano.faccin <at> intel.com; 'Rahman, 
> > Akbar'; srinivas.sreemanthula <at> nokia.com; yohba <at> tari.toshiba.com
> > Subject: RE: Mipshop Digest, Vol 28, Issue 10
> > 
> > 
> > Hi, dear Eleanor:
> >       In the past IETF66 meeting, Stefano suggested me to
> > discuss the problem how to build the AR-INFO for the MIH 
> > server during the problem statements. I don't know whether 
> > you are interested in the subject and whether your problem 
> > statement(MIH) will inculde the section about building AR-Info. 
> >       Please let me know what you suggest ?
> > 
> >  Best Regards, Sam Xia
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >
>  
>  
>  
> Akbar Rahman  
> Principal Engineer, Systems
> InterDigital Canada Ltee
> 1000 Sherbrooke Street West
> 10th Floor
> Montreal, Quebec H3A 3G4
> Tel.: +1 514.904.6270
> Fax: +1 514.904.6344
> Email: Akbar.Rahman <at> InterDigital.com http://www.InterDigital.com
> 
>  
>  
>  This e-mail is intended only for the use of the individual 
> or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain 
> information that is privileged, confidential and/or otherwise 
> protected from disclosure to anyone other than its intended 
> recipient.  Unintended transmission shall not constitute 
> waiver of any privilege or confidentiality obligation. If you 
> received this communication in error, please do not review, 
> copy or distribute it, notify me immediately by email, and 
> delete the original message and any attachments. Unless 
> expressly stated in this e-mail, nothing in this message or 
> any attachment should be construed as a digital or electronic 
> signature.
>
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Vijay Devarapalli | 11 Sep 2006 16:43

Milestones Update

Hello all,

the MIPSHOP milestones need an update as many are
past due. here is the updated list of milestones.
comments are welcome.

Oct 2006    Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-mipshop-cga-cba-XX.txt

Nov 2006    Working Group Last Call on 
draft-ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-XX.txt

Nov 2006    Working Group Last Call on 
draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-info-elements-XX.txt

Dec 2006    Working Group Last Call on
draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key-send-XX.txt

Dec 2006    Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-mipshop-3gfh-XX.txt

Jan 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-XX.txt to IESG 
for publication as Proposed Standard

Feb 2007    Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-mipshop-rfc4041bis-XX.txt

Feb 2007    Working Group Last Call on  draft-ietf-mipshop-fh80216e-XX.txt

Mar 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-3gfh-XX.txt to IESG for 
publication as Informational RFC

Mar 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-cga-cba-XX.txt to IESG for 
publication as Proposed Standard

Mar 2007    Working Group Last Call on 
draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-keys-aaa-XX.txt

Mar 2007    Working Group Last Call on HMIPv6 Security draft

Apr 2007   Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key-send-XX.txt to IESG 
for publication as Proposed Standard

Jun 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-fh80216e-XX.txt to IESG for 
publication as Informational RFC

Jul 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-hmipv6-rev-XX.txt to IESG for
publication as Proposed Standard

Jul 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-info-elements-XX.txt to IESG
for publication as Proposed Standard

Aug 2007    Begin security review of
draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-support-XX.txt

Sep 2007    Working Group Last Call on
draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-support-XX.txt

Nov 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key-aaa-XX.txt to IESG
for publication as Proposed Standard

Nov 2007    Submit draft on HMIPv6 security to IESG for publication as
Proposed Standard

Jan 2008    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-support-XX.txt to IESG for
publication as Proposed Standard

Vijay
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
James Kempf | 11 Sep 2006 19:00

Re: Milestones Update

Vijay,

I completed a revised version of the SEND keys draft in June. Currently, the 
draft is still named draft-kempf-mipshop-handover-key-00.txt in the Internet 
drafts repository since I did not receive any request from the WG chairs to 
submit it as a WG draft. IFICT, the draft is ready for WG to review.

What would you like me to do with the draft?

            jak

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Vijay Devarapalli" <vijay.devarapalli <at> azairenet.com>
To: <mipshop <at> ietf.org>
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 7:43 AM
Subject: [Mipshop] Milestones Update

> Hello all,
>
> the MIPSHOP milestones need an update as many are
> past due. here is the updated list of milestones.
> comments are welcome.
>
> Oct 2006    Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-mipshop-cga-cba-XX.txt
>
> Nov 2006    Working Group Last Call on 
> draft-ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-XX.txt
>
> Nov 2006    Working Group Last Call on 
> draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-info-elements-XX.txt
>
> Dec 2006    Working Group Last Call on
> draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key-send-XX.txt
>
> Dec 2006    Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-mipshop-3gfh-XX.txt
>
> Jan 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-XX.txt to IESG for 
> publication as Proposed Standard
>
> Feb 2007    Working Group Last Call on 
> draft-ietf-mipshop-rfc4041bis-XX.txt
>
> Feb 2007    Working Group Last Call on  draft-ietf-mipshop-fh80216e-XX.txt
>
> Mar 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-3gfh-XX.txt to IESG for publication 
> as Informational RFC
>
> Mar 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-cga-cba-XX.txt to IESG for 
> publication as Proposed Standard
>
> Mar 2007    Working Group Last Call on 
> draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-keys-aaa-XX.txt
>
> Mar 2007    Working Group Last Call on HMIPv6 Security draft
>
> Apr 2007   Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key-send-XX.txt to IESG for 
> publication as Proposed Standard
>
> Jun 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-fh80216e-XX.txt to IESG for 
> publication as Informational RFC
>
> Jul 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-hmipv6-rev-XX.txt to IESG for
> publication as Proposed Standard
>
> Jul 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-info-elements-XX.txt to IESG
> for publication as Proposed Standard
>
> Aug 2007    Begin security review of
> draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-support-XX.txt
>
> Sep 2007    Working Group Last Call on
> draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-support-XX.txt
>
> Nov 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key-aaa-XX.txt to IESG
> for publication as Proposed Standard
>
> Nov 2007    Submit draft on HMIPv6 security to IESG for publication as
> Proposed Standard
>
> Jan 2008    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-support-XX.txt to IESG for
> publication as Proposed Standard
>
> Vijay
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mipshop mailing list
> Mipshop <at> ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Vijay Devarapalli | 11 Sep 2006 19:07

RE: Milestones Update

hi Jim,

we are still waiting on a review from the Security 
Directorate. a reminder was sent to the security 
directorate mailing list on September 8th.

also this document was supposed to have been 
reviewed by the mobility directorate. but I haven't
been able to get hold of that review yet.

Vijay

> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Kempf [mailto:kempf <at> docomolabs-usa.com] 
> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 10:00 AM
> To: Vijay Devarapalli; mipshop <at> ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Mipshop] Milestones Update
> 
> Vijay,
> 
> I completed a revised version of the SEND keys draft in June. 
> Currently, the 
> draft is still named draft-kempf-mipshop-handover-key-00.txt 
> in the Internet 
> drafts repository since I did not receive any request from 
> the WG chairs to 
> submit it as a WG draft. IFICT, the draft is ready for WG to review.
> 
> What would you like me to do with the draft?
> 
>             jak
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Vijay Devarapalli" <vijay.devarapalli <at> azairenet.com>
> To: <mipshop <at> ietf.org>
> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 7:43 AM
> Subject: [Mipshop] Milestones Update
> 
> 
> > Hello all,
> >
> > the MIPSHOP milestones need an update as many are
> > past due. here is the updated list of milestones.
> > comments are welcome.
> >
> > Oct 2006    Working Group Last Call on 
> draft-ietf-mipshop-cga-cba-XX.txt
> >
> > Nov 2006    Working Group Last Call on 
> > draft-ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-XX.txt
> >
> > Nov 2006    Working Group Last Call on 
> > draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-info-elements-XX.txt
> >
> > Dec 2006    Working Group Last Call on
> > draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key-send-XX.txt
> >
> > Dec 2006    Working Group Last Call on 
> draft-ietf-mipshop-3gfh-XX.txt
> >
> > Jan 2007    Submit 
> draft-ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-XX.txt to IESG for 
> > publication as Proposed Standard
> >
> > Feb 2007    Working Group Last Call on 
> > draft-ietf-mipshop-rfc4041bis-XX.txt
> >
> > Feb 2007    Working Group Last Call on  
> draft-ietf-mipshop-fh80216e-XX.txt
> >
> > Mar 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-3gfh-XX.txt to IESG 
> for publication 
> > as Informational RFC
> >
> > Mar 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-cga-cba-XX.txt to IESG for 
> > publication as Proposed Standard
> >
> > Mar 2007    Working Group Last Call on 
> > draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-keys-aaa-XX.txt
> >
> > Mar 2007    Working Group Last Call on HMIPv6 Security draft
> >
> > Apr 2007   Submit 
> draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key-send-XX.txt to IESG for 
> > publication as Proposed Standard
> >
> > Jun 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-fh80216e-XX.txt to IESG for 
> > publication as Informational RFC
> >
> > Jul 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-hmipv6-rev-XX.txt to IESG for
> > publication as Proposed Standard
> >
> > Jul 2007    Submit 
> draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-info-elements-XX.txt to IESG
> > for publication as Proposed Standard
> >
> > Aug 2007    Begin security review of
> > draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-support-XX.txt
> >
> > Sep 2007    Working Group Last Call on
> > draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-support-XX.txt
> >
> > Nov 2007    Submit 
> draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key-aaa-XX.txt to IESG
> > for publication as Proposed Standard
> >
> > Nov 2007    Submit draft on HMIPv6 security to IESG for 
> publication as
> > Proposed Standard
> >
> > Jan 2008    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-support-XX.txt to IESG for
> > publication as Proposed Standard
> >
> > Vijay
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mipshop mailing list
> > Mipshop <at> ietf.org
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop 
> 
>
Permalink | Reply | 5 comments |
headers
Wassim Haddad | 11 Sep 2006 19:33
Picon
Picon

RE: Milestones Update

Hi,

I have not read nor heard about having this draft already adopted as a WG
item. I assume that I have missed a discussion or a special email. Can you
please clarify?

Wassim H.

On Mon, 11 Sep 2006, Vijay Devarapalli wrote:

> hi Jim,
>
> we are still waiting on a review from the Security
> Directorate. a reminder was sent to the security
> directorate mailing list on September 8th.
>
> also this document was supposed to have been
> reviewed by the mobility directorate. but I haven't
> been able to get hold of that review yet.
>
> Vijay
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: James Kempf [mailto:kempf <at> docomolabs-usa.com]
> > Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 10:00 AM
> > To: Vijay Devarapalli; mipshop <at> ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [Mipshop] Milestones Update
> >
> > Vijay,
> >
> > I completed a revised version of the SEND keys draft in June.
> > Currently, the
> > draft is still named draft-kempf-mipshop-handover-key-00.txt
> > in the Internet
> > drafts repository since I did not receive any request from
> > the WG chairs to
> > submit it as a WG draft. IFICT, the draft is ready for WG to review.
> >
> > What would you like me to do with the draft?
> >
> >             jak
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Vijay Devarapalli" <vijay.devarapalli <at> azairenet.com>
> > To: <mipshop <at> ietf.org>
> > Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 7:43 AM
> > Subject: [Mipshop] Milestones Update
> >
> >
> > > Hello all,
> > >
> > > the MIPSHOP milestones need an update as many are
> > > past due. here is the updated list of milestones.
> > > comments are welcome.
> > >
> > > Oct 2006    Working Group Last Call on
> > draft-ietf-mipshop-cga-cba-XX.txt
> > >
> > > Nov 2006    Working Group Last Call on
> > > draft-ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-XX.txt
> > >
> > > Nov 2006    Working Group Last Call on
> > > draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-info-elements-XX.txt
> > >
> > > Dec 2006    Working Group Last Call on
> > > draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key-send-XX.txt
> > >
> > > Dec 2006    Working Group Last Call on
> > draft-ietf-mipshop-3gfh-XX.txt
> > >
> > > Jan 2007    Submit
> > draft-ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-XX.txt to IESG for
> > > publication as Proposed Standard
> > >
> > > Feb 2007    Working Group Last Call on
> > > draft-ietf-mipshop-rfc4041bis-XX.txt
> > >
> > > Feb 2007    Working Group Last Call on
> > draft-ietf-mipshop-fh80216e-XX.txt
> > >
> > > Mar 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-3gfh-XX.txt to IESG
> > for publication
> > > as Informational RFC
> > >
> > > Mar 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-cga-cba-XX.txt to IESG for
> > > publication as Proposed Standard
> > >
> > > Mar 2007    Working Group Last Call on
> > > draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-keys-aaa-XX.txt
> > >
> > > Mar 2007    Working Group Last Call on HMIPv6 Security draft
> > >
> > > Apr 2007   Submit
> > draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key-send-XX.txt to IESG for
> > > publication as Proposed Standard
> > >
> > > Jun 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-fh80216e-XX.txt to IESG for
> > > publication as Informational RFC
> > >
> > > Jul 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-hmipv6-rev-XX.txt to IESG for
> > > publication as Proposed Standard
> > >
> > > Jul 2007    Submit
> > draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-info-elements-XX.txt to IESG
> > > for publication as Proposed Standard
> > >
> > > Aug 2007    Begin security review of
> > > draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-support-XX.txt
> > >
> > > Sep 2007    Working Group Last Call on
> > > draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-support-XX.txt
> > >
> > > Nov 2007    Submit
> > draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key-aaa-XX.txt to IESG
> > > for publication as Proposed Standard
> > >
> > > Nov 2007    Submit draft on HMIPv6 security to IESG for
> > publication as
> > > Proposed Standard
> > >
> > > Jan 2008    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-support-XX.txt to IESG for
> > > publication as Proposed Standard
> > >
> > > Vijay
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Mipshop mailing list
> > > Mipshop <at> ietf.org
> > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mipshop mailing list
> Mipshop <at> ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop
>
>
Permalink | Reply | 4 comments |
headers
Vijay Devarapalli | 11 Sep 2006 20:04

Re: Milestones Update

Wassim Haddad wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I have not read nor heard about having this draft already adopted as a WG
> item. I assume that I have missed a discussion or a special email. Can you
> please clarify?

its true that no such email has been sent out yet.

but the way I see it, the document has been around for a
long time. its been reviewed by many people. moreover,
mobopts recommended that this draft be adopted as a WG
document in MIPSHOP. also, I didn't see any significant
objections to adopting this document in response to the
consensus call that was sent by Gabriel on March 21 for
a bunch of documents. when the consensus call concluded
it was decided that this document should be reviewed by
the mobility directorate.

so we are waiting for the review. if there are no
significant objections, it will be adopted as a WG
document.

Vijay

> 
> 
> Wassim H.
> 
> 
> On Mon, 11 Sep 2006, Vijay Devarapalli wrote:
> 
>> hi Jim,
>>
>> we are still waiting on a review from the Security
>> Directorate. a reminder was sent to the security
>> directorate mailing list on September 8th.
>>
>> also this document was supposed to have been
>> reviewed by the mobility directorate. but I haven't
>> been able to get hold of that review yet.
>>
>> Vijay
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: James Kempf [mailto:kempf <at> docomolabs-usa.com]
>>> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 10:00 AM
>>> To: Vijay Devarapalli; mipshop <at> ietf.org
>>> Subject: Re: [Mipshop] Milestones Update
>>>
>>> Vijay,
>>>
>>> I completed a revised version of the SEND keys draft in June.
>>> Currently, the
>>> draft is still named draft-kempf-mipshop-handover-key-00.txt
>>> in the Internet
>>> drafts repository since I did not receive any request from
>>> the WG chairs to
>>> submit it as a WG draft. IFICT, the draft is ready for WG to review.
>>>
>>> What would you like me to do with the draft?
>>>
>>>             jak
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Vijay Devarapalli" <vijay.devarapalli <at> azairenet.com>
>>> To: <mipshop <at> ietf.org>
>>> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 7:43 AM
>>> Subject: [Mipshop] Milestones Update
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hello all,
>>>>
>>>> the MIPSHOP milestones need an update as many are
>>>> past due. here is the updated list of milestones.
>>>> comments are welcome.
>>>>
>>>> Oct 2006    Working Group Last Call on
>>> draft-ietf-mipshop-cga-cba-XX.txt
>>>> Nov 2006    Working Group Last Call on
>>>> draft-ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-XX.txt
>>>>
>>>> Nov 2006    Working Group Last Call on
>>>> draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-info-elements-XX.txt
>>>>
>>>> Dec 2006    Working Group Last Call on
>>>> draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key-send-XX.txt
>>>>
>>>> Dec 2006    Working Group Last Call on
>>> draft-ietf-mipshop-3gfh-XX.txt
>>>> Jan 2007    Submit
>>> draft-ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-XX.txt to IESG for
>>>> publication as Proposed Standard
>>>>
>>>> Feb 2007    Working Group Last Call on
>>>> draft-ietf-mipshop-rfc4041bis-XX.txt
>>>>
>>>> Feb 2007    Working Group Last Call on
>>> draft-ietf-mipshop-fh80216e-XX.txt
>>>> Mar 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-3gfh-XX.txt to IESG
>>> for publication
>>>> as Informational RFC
>>>>
>>>> Mar 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-cga-cba-XX.txt to IESG for
>>>> publication as Proposed Standard
>>>>
>>>> Mar 2007    Working Group Last Call on
>>>> draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-keys-aaa-XX.txt
>>>>
>>>> Mar 2007    Working Group Last Call on HMIPv6 Security draft
>>>>
>>>> Apr 2007   Submit
>>> draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key-send-XX.txt to IESG for
>>>> publication as Proposed Standard
>>>>
>>>> Jun 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-fh80216e-XX.txt to IESG for
>>>> publication as Informational RFC
>>>>
>>>> Jul 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-hmipv6-rev-XX.txt to IESG for
>>>> publication as Proposed Standard
>>>>
>>>> Jul 2007    Submit
>>> draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-info-elements-XX.txt to IESG
>>>> for publication as Proposed Standard
>>>>
>>>> Aug 2007    Begin security review of
>>>> draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-support-XX.txt
>>>>
>>>> Sep 2007    Working Group Last Call on
>>>> draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-support-XX.txt
>>>>
>>>> Nov 2007    Submit
>>> draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key-aaa-XX.txt to IESG
>>>> for publication as Proposed Standard
>>>>
>>>> Nov 2007    Submit draft on HMIPv6 security to IESG for
>>> publication as
>>>> Proposed Standard
>>>>
>>>> Jan 2008    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-support-XX.txt to IESG for
>>>> publication as Proposed Standard
>>>>
>>>> Vijay
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Mipshop mailing list
>>>> Mipshop <at> ietf.org
>>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mipshop mailing list
>> Mipshop <at> ietf.org
>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop
>>
>>
Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Narayanan, Vidya | 11 Sep 2006 20:05

RE: Milestones Update

Hi Vijay,
On draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-keys-aaa, this is still an individual
draft. All reviews (mobdir review and an individual solicited review
from a secdir member) are done and the draft has been revised. But, I
have not heard about adoption as a WG item - please let me know if the
expectation is to submit a draft-ietf version. 

Thanks,
Vidya

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vijay Devarapalli [mailto:vijay.devarapalli <at> azairenet.com] 
> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 7:43 AM
> To: mipshop <at> ietf.org
> Subject: [Mipshop] Milestones Update
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> the MIPSHOP milestones need an update as many are past due. 
> here is the updated list of milestones.
> comments are welcome.
> 
> Oct 2006    Working Group Last Call on 
> draft-ietf-mipshop-cga-cba-XX.txt
> 
> Nov 2006    Working Group Last Call on 
> draft-ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-XX.txt
> 
> Nov 2006    Working Group Last Call on 
> draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-info-elements-XX.txt
> 
> Dec 2006    Working Group Last Call on
> draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key-send-XX.txt
> 
> Dec 2006    Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-mipshop-3gfh-XX.txt
> 
> Jan 2007    Submit 
> draft-ietf-mipshop-fmipv6-rfc4068bis-XX.txt to IESG 
> for publication as Proposed Standard
> 
> Feb 2007    Working Group Last Call on 
> draft-ietf-mipshop-rfc4041bis-XX.txt
> 
> Feb 2007    Working Group Last Call on  
> draft-ietf-mipshop-fh80216e-XX.txt
> 
> Mar 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-3gfh-XX.txt to IESG for 
> publication as Informational RFC
> 
> Mar 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-cga-cba-XX.txt to IESG for 
> publication as Proposed Standard
> 
> Mar 2007    Working Group Last Call on 
> draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-keys-aaa-XX.txt
> 
> Mar 2007    Working Group Last Call on HMIPv6 Security draft
> 
> Apr 2007   Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key-send-XX.txt to IESG 
> for publication as Proposed Standard
> 
> Jun 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-fh80216e-XX.txt to IESG for 
> publication as Informational RFC
> 
> Jul 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-hmipv6-rev-XX.txt to IESG for
> publication as Proposed Standard
> 
> Jul 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-info-elements-XX.txt to IESG
> for publication as Proposed Standard
> 
> Aug 2007    Begin security review of
> draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-support-XX.txt
> 
> Sep 2007    Working Group Last Call on
> draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-support-XX.txt
> 
> Nov 2007    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-handover-key-aaa-XX.txt to IESG
> for publication as Proposed Standard
> 
> Nov 2007    Submit draft on HMIPv6 security to IESG for publication as
> Proposed Standard
> 
> Jan 2008    Submit draft-ietf-mipshop-mih-support-XX.txt to IESG for
> publication as Proposed Standard
> 
> Vijay
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mipshop mailing list
> Mipshop <at> ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mipshop
>
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane