In your previous mail you wrote:

   >  - second the verification implies an expensive crypto operation
   >    (typically a signature check) so the scheme is subject to trival DoS
   >    attack, especially if each packet has to be checked (so or a session
   >    key is negociated with an even more expensive and complex protocol,
   >    or the use of CGA/KBA is very limited).
   
   This issue can be handled.

=> I don't believe without one of the two options in the parenthesis.

   For an example in the mipv6 space, see
   draft-roe-mobileip-updateauth-02.txt.
   
=> in this I-D all mechanisms build session keys (typically with a
Deffie-Hellman exchange, i.e. IKE-like).
   
   The same applies also to DNS-based and AAA-based schemes as well.
   
=> infrastructure based systems don't need a bit per idea, sorry (:-).

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

PS: I am very unsatisfied by the result of today meeting: we are
going nowhere (which is not the same thing than not moving).
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to