Re: [Emu] Re: [Hokeyp] MSK but no EMSK

[Lakshminath Dondeti <ldondeti at qualcomm.com>]

At 06:27 AM 11/16/2006, Yoshihiro Ohba wrote:
> I made one comment around this in the HOKEY session.  The intent of my
> comment was that use of EMSK is optional.

Hi Yoshi,

Which document says that the "use" of EMSK is optional?

> There would be an
> interoperability issue if peer and server do not negotiate on the use
> of EMSK before actually using it.

The interoperability issue would only come up if there is ambiguity or options.

Lakshminath


> Yoshihiro Ohba
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 16, 2006 at 11:01:15AM +0200, Alper Yegin wrote:
> >
> > I remember someone in Hokey WG meeting mentioned that not all methods
> > generate EMSK (even though they generate MSK). Is that accurate?
> >
> > Despite this RFC 3748 text?
> >
> >    In order to provide keying material for use in a
> >    subsequently negotiated ciphersuite, an EAP method supporting key
> >    derivation MUST export a Master Session Key (MSK) of at least 64
> >    octets, and an Extended Master Session Key (EMSK) of at least 64
> >    octets.
> >
> > Alper
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Hokeyp mailing list
> > Hokeyp at opendiameter.org
> > http://www.opendiameter.org/mailman/listinfo/hokeyp
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Emu mailing list
> Emu at ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu


_______________________________________________
Emu mailing list
Emu at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emu