The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Hi. Speaking as an individual, I'd like to make an explicit call for members of the IETF community not involved in the PANA working group to review draft-ietf-pana-framework. Please speak up if you have done such a review or attempted such a review and been unsuccessful. Let us know what you t

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

On Wed, 24 May 2006, Sam Hartman wrote: Hi. Speaking as an individual, I'd like to make an explicit call for members of the IETF community not involved in the PANA working group to review draft-ietf-pana-framework. Please speak up if you have done such a review or attempted such a review and be

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

The IETF does publish protocols that may or may not be viable in the real world. I think PANA, after a significant clean up, might belong in that category. I, for instance, have the following high-level issues: ** No real use cases out there, and no real hope either. 3GPP2 HRPD recently joi

RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

ing these documents in the current stage as proposed standard RFCs concerns me. Vidya > -Original Message- > From: Sam Hartman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 8:12 AM > To: ietf@ietf.org > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: The Emperor Has No Clo

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

On Wed, 24 May 2006, Sam Hartman wrote: Hi. Speaking as an individual, I'd like to make an explicit call for members of the IETF community not involved in the PANA working group to review draft-ietf-pana-framework. Please speak up if you have done such a review or attempted such a review and

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

On 24 May 2006, at 20:52, Lucy E. Lynch wrote: I don't know if PANA will be useful, but I do know why some folks are interested... Have you taken a look at the I2 NetAuth work: http://security.internet2.edu/netauth/ These academic networks are interested in both PANA and NEA as part of the

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

On 5/24/06, Lakshminath Dondeti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ** EAP over IKEv2 seems like a more viable alternative: apparently being proposed in 3G-WLAN interworking scenario as the access auth protocol. the 3G-WLAN interworking scenario is similar to an enterprise user gaining access to the en

RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

nesday, May 24, 2006 8:12 AM > To: ietf@ietf.org > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful? > > > > Hi. Speaking as an individual, I'd like to make an explicit call for > members of the IETF community not involved in t

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

At 05:07 PM 5/24/2006, Vijay Devarapallli wrote: On 5/24/06, Lakshminath Dondeti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ** EAP over IKEv2 seems like a more viable alternative: apparently > being proposed in 3G-WLAN interworking scenario as the access auth protocol. the 3G-WLAN interworking scenario is si

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

I have reviewed the PANA framework document, the PANA protocol spec, and the PANA/IPsec document. After reading all these documents, I still do not understand why PANA is useful. The PANA framework document claims that it can be used along with IEEE 802.11i. However, IEEE 802.11 reviewed the d

RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Hi Bernard, > -Original Message- > From: Bernard Aboba [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 4:46 PM > To: ietf@ietf.org > Subject: Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful? > > I have reviewed the PANA framework document, the PA

RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

> Just below you are acknowledging the need for EAP over IP. I don't > understand how you can still claim you don't understand why PANA is > useful... The framework doesn't seem to talk much about simple EAP over IP scenarios, so I have assumed this is not the major focus. > You are aware that

RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

> > > Just below you are acknowledging the need for EAP over IP. I don't > > understand how you can still claim you don't understand why PANA is > > useful... > > The framework doesn't seem to talk much about simple EAP over IP > scenarios, so I have assumed this is not the major focus. I am sur

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 04:45:39PM -0700, Bernard Aboba wrote: > > I do understand the potential need for EAP to be encapsulated over IP. > However, in practice PANA is more complex than EAP over UDP > (see draft-thomson-nacp-02.txt), which looks like it is on the road > to becoming the defacto

RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

> Yes, that individual I-D is productized as a proprietary protocol by one > company (Cisco). As I understand it, EAP over UDP is one of the items proposed for standardization in the NEA WG. That leads me to wonder whether the IETF will be chartering multiple WGs to standardize EAP encapsulati

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

> I have other security-related issues on NACP. My view is that secure > enhancement of NACP will be equivalent to the EAP over UDP protocol > the IETF is standardizing, PANA. Can you describe why the security of PANA is better than EAP over UDP (NACP)? I had thought that they were more or less

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 09:24:03PM -0700, Bernard Aboba wrote: > > I have other security-related issues on NACP. My view is that secure > > enhancement of NACP will be equivalent to the EAP over UDP protocol > > the IETF is standardizing, PANA. > > Can you describe why the security of PANA is bet

RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

> > Yes, that individual I-D is productized as a proprietary protocol by one > > company (Cisco). > > As I understand it, EAP over UDP is one of the items proposed for > standardization in the NEA WG. You misunderstood it, despite the clear text in their charter: ... Requirements need to

RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

ondeti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 3:44 PM > To: Pekka Savola; Sam Hartman > Cc: ietf@ietf.org > Subject: Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful? > > The IETF does publish protocols that may or may not be viable > in the real world.

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

pecting to fill, but I assumed it was me being dim. josh. Josh Howlett, Networking Specialist, University of Bristol. email: josh.howlett at bristol.ac.uk | phone: +44 (0)7867 907076 | interal: 7850 ---------------- Asunto: The Empero

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Sam, I think your note is asking in fact a number of questions: 1. Is the concept of EAP-authentication over IP for network access useful, as opposed to link layer mechanisms? 2. Is the PANA realization of this idea good, and are the documents satisfactory? 3. Is there a specific real-w

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

What is the current state of the nea WG? I don't see it listed at http://ietf.org/html.charters/wg-dir.html - Ralph ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

In reading the PANA Framework document, what I read seemed to me to be more of a "system" or "solution" document than a clean IETF protocol framework. I saw efforts to address three different problems: 1) Securing an otherwise unsecured link, when the access node is not known to the client in

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Hi Lakshminath, > I guess there are differences in our understanding of 3G-WLAN > interworking (and I could be wrong), but the point is that they (plan > to) use EAP over IKEv2. We can try and debate the details offline, as > that is not central to the discussion here. There's no question of whe

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Ralph Droms wrote: >What is the current state of the nea WG? I don't see it listed at >http://ietf.org/html.charters/wg-dir.html > > NEA held a BOF in Dallas, and I believe they are planning to hold a 2nd BOF in Montreal. --Jari ___ Ietf mailing li

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

> "Alper" == Alper Yegin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> > Yes, that individual I-D is productized as a proprietary >> protocol by one > company (Cisco). >> >> As I understand it, EAP over UDP is one of the items proposed >> for standardization in the NEA WG. Alper> Yo

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

> "Ralph" == Ralph Droms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Ralph> What is the current state of the nea WG? I don't see it Ralph> listed at http://ietf.org/html.charters/wg-dir.html It had a BOF at the last IETF. It seems highly likely it will either have a proposed WG or BOF again. (Russ

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Sam - I see where the nea BOF was more-or-less associated with the Internet Area at IETF 65. Do you expect that nea would (if eventually chartered) land in Internet or Security? - Ralph On 5/26/06 10:58 AM, "Sam Hartman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> "Ralph" == Ralph Droms <[EMAIL PROTECTE

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Joel M. Halpern wrote: EAP over IP (or UDP, or link) is about authenticating the user. If a media independent technique better than just using a browser is needed, then solve that problem. Personally, I would find the work far more persuasive if it did not also try to solve the problem of c

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Dave - one quick follow on to your observation about "will not work" that falls somewhere between "will not work" and "don't like it". There is another possibility: "works, but there's a much simpler way to meet the same requirements"... - Ralph On 5/26/06 11:34 AM, "Dave Crocker" <[EMAIL PROTE

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

I have to disagree. Firstly, if many of us reading the document can not figure out what problem it is solving, then the framework is not doing its job. Secondly, if there are existing, viable, deployed solutions to the problem that the WG is attempting to solve then the WG needs to explain some

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Dave Crocker escribió: Joel M. Halpern wrote: EAP over IP (or UDP, or link) is about authenticating the user. If a media independent technique better than just using a browser is needed, then solve that problem. Personally, I would find the work far more persuasive if it did not also try

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Ralph Droms escribió: Dave - one quick follow on to your observation about "will not work" that falls somewhere between "will not work" and "don't like it". There is another possibility: "works, but there's a much simpler way to meet the same requirements"... Which one? and why it is bet

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

At 5:21 PM +0300 5/26/06, Jari Arkko wrote: Ralph Droms wrote: What is the current state of the nea WG? I don't see it listed at http://ietf.org/html.charters/wg-dir.html NEA held a BOF in Dallas, and I believe they are planning to hold a 2nd BOF in Montreal. Mailing list info:

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

> My question is more why do they need EAP in situations where they are > not running at the link layer than why do they want or not want PANA. The simple answer is that there are situations which IEEE 802.1X cannot handle on wired networks. As specified, IEEE 802.1X is "network port control",

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Antonio - I'm not well-informed enough about the specifics of the PANA problem space and framework to make definitive recommendations. I was mostly making an observation, based on my experience, of another reaction someone might have to a particular technology/design/protocol. - Ralph On 5/26/0

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

> "Bernard" == Bernard Aboba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> My question is more why do they need EAP in situations where >> they are not running at the link layer than why do they want or >> not want PANA. Bernard> The simple answer is that there are situations which IEEE

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Ralph Droms wrote: Dave - one quick follow on to your observation about "will not work" that falls somewhere between "will not work" and "don't like it". There is another possibility: "works, but there's a much simpler way to meet the same requirements"... ahh, good. this nicely permits ma

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Joel M. Halpern wrote: I have to disagree. Firstly, if many of us reading the document can not figure out what problem it is solving, then the framework is not doing its job. Secondly, if there are existing, viable, deployed solutions to the problem that the WG is attempting to solve then the W

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Joel M. Halpern wrote: I have to disagree. Firstly, if many of us reading the document can not figure out what problem it is solving, then the framework is not doing its job. As I tried to indicate, any sort of broad-based confusion about the purpose or use of a spec is a very basic indicat

RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

> > > "Bernard" == Bernard Aboba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> My question is more why do they need EAP in situations where > >> they are not running at the link layer than why do they want or > >> not want PANA. > > Bernard> The simple answer is that there are situation

RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

ard Aboba --> Cc: ietf@ietf.org --> Subject: RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful? --> --> > --> > >>>>> "Bernard" == Bernard Aboba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: --> > --> > >> My question is more why do the

RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

- Eric --> -Original Message- --> From: Narayanan, Vidya [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --> Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 2:05 PM --> To: Sam Hartman; Bernard Aboba --> Cc: ietf@ietf.org --> Subject: RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful? --> --> > --&g

RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Original Message- > From: Lakshminath Dondeti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 3:44 PM > To: Pekka Savola; Sam Hartman > Cc: ietf@ietf.org > Subject: Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful? > > The IETF does publish protocols that may o

RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Jari, > Sam, > > I think your note is asking in fact a number of questions: > > 1. Is the concept of EAP-authentication over IP for network > access useful, as opposed to link layer mechanisms? > > 2. Is the PANA realization of this idea good, and > are the documents satisfactory? > >

RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Hi Jari, > > Hi Lakshminath, > > > I guess there are differences in our understanding of 3G-WLAN > > interworking (and I could be wrong), but the point is that > they (plan > > to) use EAP over IKEv2. We can try and debate the details > offline, as > > that is not central to the discussion

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

> "Gray," == Gray, Eric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Gray,> For those of us that are just trying to follow this Gray,> discussion, what does the word "posture" mean in this Gray,> context? Assertions about your OS state--things like patch levels, configuration of security settings,

AW: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Hi Dave, thanks for your feedback. I guess your mail (and Jari's mail) try to be a little bit less biased in this discussion. ~snip~ > By contrast observations such as "there are better solutions" or 'different solutions' > moves into the > fuzzier and more subjective realm of trying to pr

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Hi Vidya, >>Re 1: I do believe an IP layer solution in this space is >>potentially useful. Not as something that replaces existing >>link layer solutions and takes over the market, but there are >>situations where it would be useful, for instance over link >>layers that have no such support, a

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Lakshminath Dondeti wrote: At 05:07 PM 5/24/2006, Vijay Devarapallli wrote: On 5/24/06, Lakshminath Dondeti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ** EAP over IKEv2 seems like a more viable alternative: apparently > being proposed in 3G-WLAN interworking scenario as the access auth protocol. the 3G-WLAN

RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Ever since PANA was first proposed, I did not understand why the IETF accepted it as a work item, because it seemed to me that it was duplicating existing capabilities (e.g., RADIUS, Diameter, etc.) and thereby needlessly increasing complexity system-wide. By this discussion, I surmise that you ha

RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Hi Jari, > > Hi Vidya, > > >>Re 1: I do believe an IP layer solution in this space is > potentially > >>useful. Not as something that replaces existing link layer > solutions > >>and takes over the market, but there are situations where > it would be > >>useful, for instance over link laye

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

I tried this in my secdir review, for instance suggesting that perhaps PANA-IPsec should be limited to IKEv2 and 4301 and people had different opinions ranging from 'not sure about forcing IKEv2 on PANA' to 'there wouldn't be any differentiator to PANA' (they are not quotes; I am paraphrasing),

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Lakshminath Dondeti wrote: > I tried this in my secdir review, for instance suggesting that perhaps > PANA-IPsec should be limited to IKEv2 and 4301 and people had > different opinions ranging from 'not sure about forcing IKEv2 on PANA' > to 'there wouldn't be any differentiator to PANA' (they are

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Vidya, Administratively scoped multicast is not the only way for PAA discovery. DHCP based PAA discovery is also available: draft-ietf-dhc-paa-option-02.txt Regards, Yoshihiro Ohba On Fri, May 26, 2006 at 04:34:22PM -0700, Narayanan, Vidya wrote: > Hi Jari, > > > > > Hi Vidya, > > > > >>Re

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Vidya, Overall, network access authentication and establishing IPsec SA are two related but different things. EAP over IKEv2 is an integrated approach while PANA framework is a split approach. In general, both approaches have pros and cons. Speaking of the split approach, there are number of re

RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Hello Sam, Please find my inline specific replies. > Hi. Speaking as an individual, I'd like to make an explicit > call for members of the IETF community not involved in the > PANA working group to review draft-ietf-pana-framework. Hmm, not involved in the PANA working group... At least I am

AW: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Hi Jari, > Anyway, I agree with Dave Crocker that the bar should be > higher for using "there's another solution" argument in last > call discussion of chartered work than in, say, a BOF > discussion. Perhaps we should focus more on whether > the function itself is something that we agree on, and

RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Lakshminath, Please see inline... > -Original Message- > From: Lakshminath Dondeti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 2:32 PM > To: Avi Lior; Pekka Savola; Sam Hartman > Cc: ietf@ietf.org > Subject: RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actuall

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

e at this point. Brian Avi Lior wrote: Lakshminath, Please see inline... -Original Message- From: Lakshminath Dondeti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 2:32 PM To: Avi Lior; Pekka Savola; Sam Hartman Cc: ietf@ietf.org Subject: RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: I

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Hi Joel, Thank you for spending your time reading the framework document and sending your feedback. Please see my response below. On Fri, May 26, 2006 at 08:27:29AM -0400, Joel M. Halpern wrote: > In reading the PANA Framework document, what I read seemed to me to > be more of a "system" or "s

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

* Bernard Aboba: >> My question is more why do they need EAP in situations where they are >> not running at the link layer than why do they want or not want PANA. > > The simple answer is that there are situations which IEEE 802.1X cannot > handle on wired networks. As specified, IEEE 802.1X is

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

> Isn't this just a "don't do that, then" scenario? Plugging in a hub > tends to undermine much of the accountability 802.1X is supposed to > provide. Sure, except that the cost of "don't do that" is rather high -- a switch port for every host. > Anyway, 802.1X is terminally broken because end

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?,

I have been trying to post the following message last few days but failed. Another try.. Subir Das wrote: I have read both PANA protocol and PANA framework drafts. I understand the concept and it is an useful protocol to me. In particular, EAP over IP is necessary, IMO, and my understanding is

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Hi Joel, Reading the entire thread, I think we should seriously consider your detailed suggestions to improve the PANA framework draft for broader acceptance in the community. Thank you, Yoshihiro Ohba On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 09:42:25AM -0400, Joel M. Halpern wrote: > I think the confusion and

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

I think the confusion and complexity that I perceive comes from the fact that the framework problem treats all the tasks (user authentication, network selection, and securing the network connection as being of the same significance or same relationship to the solution. I think that most of th

RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --> > --> Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 2:05 PM --> > --> To: Sam Hartman; Bernard Aboba --> > --> Cc: ietf@ietf.org --> > --> Subject: RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA --> actually useful? --> > --> --&g

RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Sam, Thanks! -- E --> -Original Message- --> From: Sam Hartman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --> Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 5:20 PM --> To: Gray, Eric --> Cc: Narayanan, Vidya; Bernard Aboba; ietf@ietf.org --> Subject: Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PA

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Yoshihiro Ohba wrote: Hi Joel, Reading the entire thread, I think we should seriously consider your detailed suggestions to improve the PANA framework draft for broader acceptance in the community. Which is strong hint that this discussion now belongs on the PANA mailing list. Brian _

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?,

I have read both PANA protocol and PANA framework drafts. I understand the concept and it seems to me an useful protocol. In particular, EAP over IP is necessary, IMO, and my understanding is that PANA base protocol is all about EAP over IP. The framework document should be an informational one

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

Dave Crocker wrote: I would find it particularly helpful to have a concise statement from someone who says that PANA will not work. Cannot be implemented (properly) by virtue of technical errors or documentation too confusing to understand. Or cannot be deployed and used, by virtue of administra

Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?,

I happened to hit this thread and read the PANA framework document. I eventually had a similar impression below. The framework document may be a bit meticulous, but the protocol itself doesn’t look so complicated. L2 level of authentication will usually provide optimal performance on each indiv

Re: AW: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

> > > A small comment when it comes to understand > documents: > > I have realized that it is popular in > standardization organizations to > be temporarly and selectively confused about some > things. > > I suspect that you can copy-and-paste Sam's mail, > replace PANA with > another pro

NEA scope (RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?)

be done on our documents. With that in mind, here is the first thread. > -Original Message- > From: Sam Hartman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 8:05 AM > To: Alper Yegin > Cc: 'Bernard Aboba'; ietf@ietf.org > Subject: Re: The Emperor Has N

Complexity (was RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?)

> GEE is but a small optional enhancement to address the > case of parallel EAP authentications. GEE is not an EAP lower layer > and thus it is invalid to compare it to PANA. What is GEE than? Please explain it to us in terms of RFC 3748. > So far evaluations done by the broader > community seem

automatic discovery [Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?]

On Sat, 27 May 2006, Yoshihiro Ohba wrote: Vidya, Administratively scoped multicast is not the only way for PAA discovery. DHCP based PAA discovery is also available: draft-ietf-dhc-paa-option-02.txt I suspect adminsitratively scoped multicast discovery wouldn't be acceptable for much the

Framework document scope (RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?)

> > I have to disagree. > Firstly, if many of us reading the document can not figure out what > problem it is solving, then the framework is not doing its job. Framework document discusses deployments. Problem statement and requirements is what you are looking for (RFC 4058). > Secondly, if ther

Re: Complexity (was RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?)

At 03:20 PM 5/26/2006, Alper Yegin wrote: > So far evaluations done by the broader > community seem to be concluding that PANA is in fact complex and not > easily deployable. Who would that community be? I have heard the complexity issue from you and few others multiple times, but there has nev

RE: Complexity (was RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?)

; From: Lakshminath Dondeti [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 3:58 PM > To: Alper Yegin > Cc: ietf@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Complexity (was RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA > actually useful?) > > At 03:20 PM 5/26/2006, Alper Yegin wrote: > > > So

RE: Complexity (was RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?)

t: Friday, May 26, 2006 3:58 PM > To: Alper Yegin > Cc: ietf@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Complexity (was RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA > actually useful?) > > At 03:20 PM 5/26/2006, Alper Yegin wrote: > > > So far evaluations done by the broader > > > communi

Re: Complexity (was RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?)

Alper Yegin wrote: Are you aware that you are not answering my question? Please describe where you see unnecessary complexity, and suggest remedies. Noone came near answering these, so throwing the ball to someone else wont help. from what I can tell, it does not matter ve

RE: Complexity (was RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?)

> > I am really not going to spend any more *substantial* time on this thread. > > regards, > Lakshminath > > > > >Alper > > > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Lakshminath Dondeti [mailto:[EMAIL

RE: Complexity (was RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?)

Alper > > I am really not going to spend any more *substantial* time on this thread. > > regards, > Lakshminath > > > > >Alper > > > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Lakshminath Dondeti [mailto:[EMAIL

Re: Complexity (was RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?)

Alper Yegin wrote: >We need to discuss these in more details. Before we jump to pruning >features, we need to first identify the source of complexity in the design, >then discuss if it can be simplified (is that feature really needed, are >there alternatives solutions). Only after then we can deci

RE: Complexity (was RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?)

It looks > > > like I am in good company in expressing my opinions. > > > >How is it useful if people make subjective claims like "PANA is too > complex" > >(and carry it to the extent to justify deprecating this effort based on > that > >claim), withou

PANA vs. RADIUS/Diameter (RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?)

> Ever since PANA was first proposed, I did not understand why the IETF > accepted it as a work item, because it seemed to me that it was > duplicating existing capabilities (e.g., RADIUS, Diameter, etc.) and > thereby needlessly increasing complexity system-wide. Sigh This is why some people

IETF-SDO liaison (was Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?)

Avi Lior wrote: The statement regaring GEE and PANA was not made by me but rather by your company! In order to sway support towards EAP over HRPD, Qualcom made statements that PANA was dead at the IETF and that GEE will be standardize at the IETF. perhaps the IETF should have been consulted t

RE: IETF-SDO liaison (was Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?)

; From: Vijay Devarapalli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 2:53 PM > To: Avi Lior > Cc: ietf@ietf.org > Subject: IETF-SDO liaison (was Re: The Emperor Has No > Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?) > > Avi Lior wrote: > > > The statement regaring

Re: IETF-SDO liaison (was Re: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?)

> I think it is our collective responsiblity not to make false claims > when moving our agenda forward. This is true with any group. Very much in agreement. > Liaison should not be used for fact checking. Speaking as a liaison, this sort of fact checking (what is the real status of WG X or Docu

EAP/IKEv2 as an alternative to PANA (RE: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?)

> >If the latter, the most natural solution to use is IKEv2 with EAP, since > >even with PANA, you still need to run IKE/IKEv2 and IPsec - so, I don't > >see what benefit PANA provides here. > > > > > My comment above relates to the overall interest in an IP layer solution > without considering wha