Subject: [Hipsec] Base draft, snapshot 25.05.2005

From: Petri Jokela <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 22:21:38 +0300 (EEST)

I uploaded the current version of the base draft to our server, the 
snapshot is dated 25.5.2005 (250505):

http://hip4inter.net/draft.php

The diff is between the 13th of May and this newer version. The diff is, 
unfortunately, a bit broken at the end of the document.

Open issue: There is one comment about the CER packet: the description is 
unclear. I haven't yet touched that, but the question is: should I?

The following editions have been made:

- New IANA section

- New Appendix C (sample Cookie handling at the Responder, based on Aura's 
comments)

- ECHO_REQ/RESP messages numbering changed so that both are now critical 
(earlier, ECHO_REQ/RESP inside the SIGNATURE were not marked as critical, 
but outside they were). I couldn't find any reasoning for the different 
numbering from earlier mails.

- ENCRYPTED parameter description and HMAC calculation (6.3.1) changed 
(based on Miika's and Jeff's mail)

- 6.6 Changed the statement "Under no circumstances does the HIP state 
machine transition upon sending an R1" to only recommendation. In another 
place in the document it is said that the host may keep information about 
incoming I1s which means keeping some kind of state. Because this is an 
implementation issue, I don't think that we can mandate the implementation 
not to keep state based on I1-messages. But: please comment this edition.

/petri

-- 
Petri Jokela                        Tel:    +358 9 299 2413
Research scientist                  Fax:    +358 9 299 3535
NomadicLab, Ericsson Research       Mobile: +358 44 299 2413
Oy L M Ericsson Ab                  email: [email-masked]

_______________________________________________
Hipsec mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec