Pekka's comments about HBAs (was Re: Comments on multi6dt documents

Hi Pekka,

thanks for the feedback
some replies online

El 09/11/2004, a las 1:36, Pekka Savola escribió:
>
> ===============================
> HBA:
>
> substantial
> -----------
>
> I think there are two big issues:
>
>  1) The spec should have a clear section which describes the 
> assumptions
> placed upon the features which must be supported in the multi6 
> solution.  In
> this particular case, for example, the CGA Parameter Data Structure 
> needs to
> be passed to the peers out of band

what do you mean by out of band?

i mean the CGA_PDS has to be communicates to the other end, but it will 
be sent in clear through the multi6 protocol.
i.e. there is no need to hide the CGA_PDS to obtain the security of HBAs

ok?

>  because otherwise they can't perform
> verification.  This might help in figuring out how the HBA address
> generation integrates to the rest of the multi6 solution problem space.
>

I agree that an explanation of how the HBAs could be used in a multi6 
protocol is needed in the draft.
I was thinking to include an example in an appendix

>  2) IPR.  Unfortunately, SEND had IPR; fortunately, RF licensing was 
> granted
> for implementations of SEND.  Someone has to figure out how generic 
> those
> patent applications were, i.e., whether HBA would be covered as well.
>

Agree, but the chairs suggested to first figure out if HBA are good and 
then go for the IPR stuff, which imho is a good approach

>
> editorial
> ---------
>
> 5.  HBA verification
>
> ==> I spotted about 3 typos in this section, and one helluva long 
> paragraph
> which should be split up.
>

ok, i will fix this

thanks, marcelo