[Mip4] RE: [Dime] RE: Issue 3: Diameter MIP4 Application vs. RADIUSArchitecture

["Alper Yegin" <alper.yegin at yegin.org>]

Pete,

> > 2. The point here is not about Diameter as an AAA protocol, however,
> > it is about the concept of coupling the MIPv4 control signaling to
> > AAA signaling. Which many people do not think it is a good idea and
> > believe that it is a deviation from RFC3344 initial MIPv4
> > registration procedure. Do not you agree?
> 
> No, I don't.  Putting the Registration Request in the AMR is a feature.
> It allows the registration to happen in one round-trip.

Obviously it is a feature. But don't you think it is a bit of a hack? I
mean, tunneling one protocol inside another for the sake of saving
round-trips? For example, we could further reduce the round-trips by
tunneling MIP4 inside EAP of network access authentication.

I also understand that having to go to HAAA twice for each MIP RegReq is
bothersome. But then, maybe we should re-consider the necessity of MN-FA
authentication. Given that HA is going to authenticate the MN, does FA also
need to do the same?

Alper








-- 
Mip4 mailing list: Mip4 at ietf.org
    Web interface: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip4
     Charter page: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/mip4-charter.html
Supplemental site: http://www.mip4.org/