Subject: [Mip6] Using IPsec between mobile and correspondent IPv6 node

From: Warodom Werapun <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2005 14:09:55 +0700

I have read draft-dupont-mipv6-cn-ipsec-00.txt, they sugguests to 
use IPsec to protect Return routability (RR) method before process 
binding update.  It solves man in the middle attack problems in HA-CN 
and  MN-CN path,right?  So, The Kbm using in BU and BA are safed now.
    But Instead of using IPSec to protect RR method, why we don't use 
IPSec to protect BU? Does it make handoff process faster? :-)

Thank you for your reply,
-- 
Warodom  Werapun
PGP:  http://plex.coe.psu.ac.th/myPGP.txt

_______________________________________________
Mip6 mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6

---

From: Francis Dupont <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2005 13:18:30 +0200

In your previous mail you wrote:

=> it is draft-ietf-mip6-cn-ipsec-01.txt now.

=> no, IPsec is used to verify HoA option and to protect RO signaling
in this draft.

=> I believe you make some confusion between RFC 377[56] which uses
IPsec to protect some RR messages and the draft which protects directly
the BU/BA,

   IPSec to protect BU?

=> this is the idea of the draft.

    Does it make handoff process faster? :-)

=> of course it is faster because there is no RR phase (.5 RTT in place
of >1.5 RTT).
   
Can you read the last version and if you find it is not clear enough
propose improvements? I know the wording is not so good and as it will
be last called soon...

Thanks

[email-masked]