Subject: RE: Support for multiple default routers

From: "Hesham Soliman (EAB)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 18:30:56 +0200

> So, I agree
  > 
  > but shouldn't we first decide if separating is an
  > option or not? 

=> I don't think so, if that's your decision, just 
pick the right option from the mail I sent or add
a new option.

Hesham

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 08:32:01 -0500

>Hi,
>some comments and questions...
>
>If there are many PAAs in the same link, they all are most probably
>connected to some kind of local AAA server. If PaC's authentication
>succeeds, AAA server could send Success -message with needed information
>about PaC (e.g. IP-address, lifetime, ...) to all PAAs in that link.
>Separation of PAA and EPs would be avoided and there would be no
>unnecessary registrations or bandwith consumption.
>Could this be one possibility?

While the scenario that you suggest above is possible, it is not
the most optimal. The complexity of separating the PAA and EP is worth
the suboptimal mechanism of multicasting the response to all PAAs on a
link (IMO).

>
>If PANA is used to deliver keying material to PaC and PAA, how is it
>handled when multiple default routers are present? PaC needs different
>pair of authentication and encrypting keys to every default router it
>uses. Could a new protocol between PAAs and many EPs handle this? Or would
>it still be simpler to PaC to authenticate to all those PAAs/routers it
>really needs? Or could the proposal above be used, so that AAA server
>delivers keying material to all PAAs?

Again, another reason why having a single PAA serve multiple ARs on a
link is preferred. But even with a single PAA, the keys will/may need to
be delivered to all the ARs on the link. 

>
>
>It would be nice to hear some comments on these,
>
>Ilkka
>
-Basavaraj
>
>--
>Ilkka Vesa ([email-masked])
>Tampere University of Technology