1 / 6

PANA Framework Last Call Issues

PANA Framework Last Call Issues. Yoshihiro Ohba, Alper Yegin, Mohan Parthasarathy, Rafa Marin Lopez, Prakash Jayaraman. Technical Comment 1/4. Issue: How PMK for each AP is obtained by PaC? Proposed resolution: Add text mentioning that PMK is derived from AAA-Key

mary
Télécharger la présentation

PANA Framework Last Call Issues

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PANA Framework Last Call Issues Yoshihiro Ohba, Alper Yegin, Mohan Parthasarathy, Rafa Marin Lopez, Prakash Jayaraman IETF61 PANA WG

  2. Technical Comment 1/4 • Issue: How PMK for each AP is obtained by PaC? • Proposed resolution: • Add text mentioning that PMK is derived from AAA-Key • Note: List of APs are carried in Device-Id AVPs in PANA-Bind-Request IETF61 PANA WG

  3. Technical Comment 2/4 • Section 10.2.1: “Note that for all of the cases described in this section, PBR and PBA exchange in PANA should occur after installing the authorization parameter to AR, so that IKE can be performed immediately after PANA is successfully completed.” • Issue: How can PAA install filtering rules for PaC to EP before receiving PBA with Device-Id AVP? • Discussion: • The device-id of the PaC can be obtained from MAC/IP headers • However, when the PBR/PBA exchange fails, the authorization parameters installed in EP must be immediately revoked • Proposed resolution: • Add text that explains the discussion result IETF61 PANA WG

  4. Technical Comment 3/4 • Issue: In section 10.1 (DSL), DSLAM is missing in Figures 7 and 8 • In the current DSL deployment, DSLAM is a transparent device from PANA perspective • In a future DSL model, PAA can reside in DSLAM which directly connects ISP routers through VLANs • Proposed resolution: • Add DSLAM in Figures 7 and 8 (but PAA is still in the NAS) • Add text on the future DSL model IETF61 PANA WG

  5. Technical Comment 4/4 • Issue: Why do we have separate DHCP servers in some of the diagrams ("PRPA DHCPv4 Server" and "POPA DHCPv4 Server")? • Discussion: • PRPA address space (and DHCP server) and POPA address space (and DHCP server) could be under different administrative domains • Proposed resolution: • Use a single DHCP server for the diagrams and add the separation possibility in the text IETF61 PANA WG

  6. Thank You! IETF61 PANA WG

More Related