Subject: [mobile-ip] closing the sol/adv security issue

From: Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 23:10:19 +0300

Folks,

We need to close this issue and move on.

Over the course of the discussion a number of observations and
comments have been made. There seems to be some amount of disagreement
about the level of security needed. We have also debated the
order of events, the specific protocol that should carry
the discovery messages, what information the MNs need to have
at startup anyway, and so on.

How to agree then? Given disagreement about the security level,
perhaps it would be easiest to accept the tougher requirements.

The question is, does this cause problems for us?
Fortunately, this does appear to be so. As has been discussed,
an SA and a potential home address is available in any case
for the MN, so perhaps these could be used.

Also, we have discussed whether protecting ICMPv6 would cause
additional problems. I don't think it will -- if a packet
matches the SPD entry it will be protected to the home agent. If
not it, it will be sent in the clear. Either way, the HA will
get even ICMP errors and other messages. A separate SA should
be used for MH and ICMPv6.

We have also discussed whether to use MH or ICMPv6 for the messages.
My proposal is that we stick to the current approach, i.e. ICMPv6 to avoid
too much document (and implementation) change.

So here's a proposal on how to move forward:

1. Keep the current messages and functionality.
2. Require that all sol/adv messages be protected.
3. Document the fact that the mobile nodes can have
    some home address to begin with, and must in any case
    have SA(s).

Ok?

Jari