Re: [Pana] status of wg documents

[Julien Bournelle <julien.bournelle at gmail.com>]

Hi glen all,

On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 7:56 AM, Glen Zorn <gwz at net-zen.net> wrote:

Basavaraj.Patil at nokia.com [mailto:Basavaraj.Patil at nokia.com] writes:

> We had a pretty lengthy discussion about this. The PAA/EP can be
> colocated
> or could be separate. In the case where the PAA/EP are separate, the
> link
> needs to be secured. The conclusion (in the WG) was that the security
> mechanism between the PAA and EP is a choice of the deployment and
> hence
> does not need to be specified.

That's rather bizarre; the ADs are OK with this?

At a time of PANA specification, a huge work happened to simplify the PANA protocol and its companions documents. (see: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pana/current/msg02261.html)

We had a proposal based on SNMPv3 (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pana-snmp-06) to implement the PAA-to-EP protocol which has been finally rejected as mentionned by Raj.

 My 2 cents,

 Best regards,

 Julien
 

> >
> > but I can't find anything in any document that says how to do this.
> What am
> > I missing?
>
> Does the above explanation help?

Quite clarifying, thank you.

>
> -Raj
>
> >
> > ...
> >
> >
>


_______________________________________________
Pana mailing list
Pana at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pana