Re: [Dime] DiME ERP - Getting the message flows right
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Dime] DiME ERP - Getting the message flows right
Hmmm. Interesting.
From your description I would go for a direct exchange between local ERP
server and home EAP server.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: dime-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:dime-bounces at ietf.org] On
>Behalf Of ext Sebastien Decugis
>Sent: 17 March, 2009 08:28
>To: Hannes Tschofenig
>Cc: dime at ietf.org; hokey at ietf.org
>Subject: Re: [Dime] DiME ERP - Getting the message flows right
>
>Hi again,
>
>After trying to capture the new mechanism (based on a new application
>id) in a document, I have encountered an issue and I am not
>sure what is the proper way to solve it.
>
>When the local ER server (aka HOKEY server in the visited
>domain) needs to retrieve the rDSRK material (i.e. it was not
>bootstrapped already) this material can not be provided
>directly by the Home ER server, because of the key hierarchy:
>
>EMSK (in Home EAP server)
>|
>+- rRK (in Home ERP server)
>|
>+- DSRK (in Home EAP server or a local server)
> |
> +- rDSRK (in local ERP server)
>
>There are two ways to get this material:
>- through the home ERP server (in this case the home ER server
>receives visited domain specific keying material, which may
>not be good)
>- directly with an exchange between local ERP server and home
>EAP server.
>
>This second option would be shown as follow ( exchange (c) ):
>
>> Diameter EAP +-------------+ Diameter EAP +-------------+
>> | | | |
>> <------------>| Local |<---------------->| Home |
>> | Diameter | | Diameter |
>> | EAP Proxy | | EAP Server |
>> | | ----->| |
>> +-------------+ / +-------------+
>> ^ / ^
>> (a)| proprietary (c) proprietary |(b)
>> v / v
>> +-------------+ <-----/ +-------------+
>> Diameter ERP | | | |
>> | Local | Diameter ERP | Home |
>> <------------>| Diameter |<---------------->| Diameter |
>> | ERP Server | | ERP Server |
>> | | | |
>> +-------------+ +-------------+
>>
>
>Note that the exchange (b) is needed anyway for the case when
>the peer is in its home domain.
>
>
>Does anybody have some comments on this?
>
>Thank you,
>Sebastien.
>
>
>--
>Sebastien Decugis
>Research fellow
>Network Architecture Group
>NICT (nict.go.jp)
>
>_______________________________________________
>DiME mailing list
>DiME at ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime
>
Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.