RE: [HOKEY] EMSK Issue

2008-04-08 Thread Bernard Aboba
05, 2008 2:59 PM To: Narayanan, Vidya Cc: Glen Zorn; ietf@ietf.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Bernard Aboba Subject: Re: [HOKEY] EMSK Issue Narayanan, Vidya wrote: How about the following text for applicability: It must be noted that any application of EAP keying material to other usages

Re: [HOKEY] EMSK Issue

2008-04-05 Thread Charles Clancy
Narayanan, Vidya wrote: How about the following text for applicability: It must be noted that any application of EAP keying material to other usages such as handoffs, IP mobility or other applications is only feasible when those services are provided either by or through the provider

RE: [HOKEY] EMSK Issue

2008-03-30 Thread Joseph Salowey (jsalowey)
: Monday, March 24, 2008 11:27 AM To: Charles Clancy Cc: ietf@ietf.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Bernard Aboba Subject: Re: [HOKEY] EMSK Issue Charles, -Original Message- From: Charles Clancy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 7:18 PM To: Narayanan, Vidya Cc

RE: [HOKEY] EMSK Issue

2008-03-24 Thread Bernard Aboba
For example, consider using a USRK to secure HTTP. If your access provider did this to deliver firmware updates to your handset, this might be reasonable, but if amazon.com required it for authentication, this would be unreasonable. I do not believe that either application is reasonable.

RE: [HOKEY] EMSK Issue

2008-03-24 Thread Narayanan, Vidya
Charles, -Original Message- From: Charles Clancy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 7:18 PM To: Narayanan, Vidya Cc: Glen Zorn; ietf@ietf.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Bernard Aboba Subject: Re: [HOKEY] EMSK Issue Vidya, ... do the responsible thing, which

Re: [HOKEY] EMSK Issue

2008-03-23 Thread Charles Clancy
Vidya, ... do the responsible thing, which would be to clearly define the applicability, along with providing an interoperable means of defining the key hierarchy for those usages that want to/can use it. This is all I'm suggesting we do. I think we should add text to the document that

RE: [HOKEY] EMSK Issue

2008-03-20 Thread Glen Zorn
Brian E Carpenter mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] scribbled on Tuesday, March 18, 2008 11:02 PM: Glen, On 2008-03-19 04:31, Glen Zorn wrote: ... Some of us don't subscribe to the IETF list (due to the extremely poor S/N ratio). Someone did forward me Bernard's original message to me it

RE: [HOKEY] EMSK Issue

2008-03-18 Thread Avi Lior
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Glen Zorn Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 11:31 AM To: Charles Clancy Cc: ietf@ietf.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Bernard Aboba Subject: Re: [HOKEY] EMSK Issue Charles Clancy scribbled on : HOKEY, From Bernard's walled garden LC comments, I've

RE: [HOKEY] EMSK Issue

2008-03-18 Thread Glen Zorn
Charles Clancy scribbled on : HOKEY, From Bernard's walled garden LC comments, I've created the following issue below in the issue tracker. Some of us don't subscribe to the IETF list (due to the extremely poor S/N ratio). Someone did forward me Bernard's original message to me it

RE: [HOKEY] EMSK Issue

2008-03-18 Thread Narayanan, Vidya
/ietf/current/msg50880.html - Vidya -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Glen Zorn Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2008 8:31 AM To: Charles Clancy Cc: ietf@ietf.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Bernard Aboba Subject: Re: [HOKEY] EMSK Issue Charles

Re: [HOKEY] EMSK Issue

2008-03-18 Thread Brian E Carpenter
Glen, On 2008-03-19 04:31, Glen Zorn wrote: ... Some of us don't subscribe to the IETF list (due to the extremely poor S/N ratio). Someone did forward me Bernard's original message to me it appears to fall squarely into the N category (either that or it is an early April 1 RFC candidate).