Hi,

> There is one problem with allowing ping in access phase only.
>
> Suppose both a PaC and a PAA are in access phase, and the PaC sends a
> ping request while the PAA sends a PAR to start re-authentication at
> the same time.  Then PAA will not accept the ping request because it
> has entered re-authentication phase.  If ping is allowed in any
> state, then PAA can answer to the ping request.
>
> BTW, I've found another issue here.  In the above example, The PaC
> will accept the PAR sent from the PAA and can return a PAN, but it
> cannot send a new PAR (this can happen if the PAN does not carry EAP),
> until the ping request is answered.  This is actually breaking
> lock-step behavior of PANA (queuing requests should not be required
> for a lock-step protocol).
>
> If the ping message is handled independently of other messages, then
> this kind of corner case will not exist.
>
> I now remember Mark's suggestion to have a separate sequence number
> space for pana ping and handle pana ping independently of other pana
> messages.  I am now pretty motivated for it :)
>   

I agree. So I guess "independent" would mean that ping processing could
be exchange at anytime after the initial PAR/PAA and maybe in parallel
with other exchanges.


>   
>> b. In Sec 5.5:
>>
>> "
>>      *  In the access phase:
>>
>>         +  PANA-Auth-Request.
>> "
>>
>> Just for clarity, maybe it should be "+  PANA-Auth-Request with any of its 
>> bit flag set".
>>     
>
> I think the current text is sufficient.
>
> BTW, at least 'R' bit is set for PAR :)
>   

Yes your right :)

>   
>> c. Optional text we want to consider for the same complexity reason as (a) 
>> above.
>>
>> -- Sec 4.2.; First paragraph; Add a sentence: "The ping request MUST be 
>> sent only when there are no other pending un-answered request".
>> -- Same with sec 4.3 and 4.4 with regards to re-auth and termination 
>> request. Not sure how to phrase it though. Maybe "A PANA session MUST not 
>> enter the
>>   [re-auth|termination] phase while there are pending un-answered request" 
>>   (??).
>>     
>
> I think this is already covered in the following sentence in Section 5.2:
>
> "A peer can only have one outstanding request at a time."
>   

Ah ok.



regards,
victor


_______________________________________________
Pana mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pana

Reply via email to