#28: Missing Security Consideration - AAA protection of the MSK

Changes (by hannes.tschofenig@…):

 * cc: hannes.tschofenig@… (added)
 * status:  new => closed
 * resolution:   => fixed


Comment:

 RADIUS and Diameter currently provide the same level of security when it
 comes to the protection of the protocol exchanges between neighboring
 RADIUS/Diameter nodes.

 There is no end-to-end security mechanism (i.e., RADIUS client <-> RADIUS
 server; Diameter client <-> Diameter server) standardized although there
 are discussions in the DIME working group to add functionality. An example
 contribution can be found with http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-korhonen-
 dime-e2e-security-00 and with  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zorn-dime-
 n2n-sec-lite-02.

 I would suggest to raise the issue of MSK security in the security
 consideration section. I put a placeholder there.

-- 
--------------------+--------------------------------------
 Reporter:  ietf@…  |       Owner:  draft-ietf-abfab-arch@…
     Type:  defect  |      Status:  closed
 Priority:  major   |   Milestone:
Component:  arch    |     Version:
 Severity:  -       |  Resolution:  fixed
 Keywords:          |
--------------------+--------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/abfab/trac/ticket/28#comment:1>
abfab <http://tools.ietf.org/abfab/>

_______________________________________________
abfab mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/abfab

Reply via email to