Re: [MEXT] Call for WG adoption of I-D: draft-korhonen-mext-mip6-altsec

Inline:

On 1/24/11 3:58 PM, "ext Arnaud Ebalard" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>To me, what the draft describes is a patchwork based on MIPv6, ESP and
>TLS. Instead of building on top of those protocols (read modularity and
>interoperability), it reuses (hijacks) various blocks of associated
>standards in a non-modular way. For instance, one has to reimplement ESP
>in userspace to support the protocol.

We are specifying an encapsulation method in the I-D. To say that one has
to reimplement ESP in userspace is incorrect.
We are reusing TLS which is widely implemented today. I do not see a
problem with reuse.

>
>Additionally, it does not support RO.

We are adding RO support to the spec. It is not a big deal to support RO
between MIP6 nodes. Securing the RO signaling messages between the MN-HA
uses the same method used for the BU/BAck messages.

-Raj

>
>Cheers,
>
>a+
>
>[1]: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.ietf.mip6/10368
>_______________________________________________
>MEXT mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext