| draft-ietf-eap-netsel-problem-01.txt | eapns.txt | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Extensible Authentication Protocol J. Arkko | Extensible Authentication Protocol J. Arkko | |||
| Internet-Draft Ericsson | Internet-Draft Ericsson | |||
| Expires: January 15, 2005 B. Aboba, Eds. | Expires: April 25, 2005 B. Aboba, Eds. | |||
| Microsoft | Microsoft | |||
| July 17, 2004 | October 25, 2004 | |||
| Network Discovery and Selection Problem | Network Discovery and Selection Problem | |||
| draft-ietf-eap-netsel-problem-01 | draft-ietf-eap-netsel-problem-02 | |||
| Status of this Memo | Status of this Memo | |||
| By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable | This document is an Internet-Draft and is subject to all provisions | |||
| patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed, | of section 3 of RFC 3667. By submitting this Internet-Draft, each | |||
| and any of which I become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with | author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of | |||
| RFC 3667. | which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of | |||
| which he or she become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with | ||||
| RFC 3668. | ||||
| Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | |||
| Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other | Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that | |||
| groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. | other groups may also distribute working documents as | |||
| Internet-Drafts. | ||||
| Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | |||
| and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | |||
| time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | |||
| material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | |||
| The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http:// | The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at | |||
| www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. | http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. | |||
| The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at | The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at | |||
| http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. | http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. | |||
| This Internet-Draft will expire on January 15, 2005. | This Internet-Draft will expire on April 25, 2005. | |||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved. | Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| The so called network discovery and selection problem affects network | The so called network discovery and selection problem affects network | |||
| access, particularly in the presence of multiple available wireless | access, particularly in the presence of multiple available wireless | |||
| accesses and roaming. This problem has been the subject of | accesses and roaming. This problem has been the subject of | |||
| discussions in various standards bodies. This document summarizes the | discussions in various standards bodies. This document summarizes | |||
| discussion held about this problem in the Extensible Authentication | the discussion held about this problem in the Extensible | |||
| Protocol (EAP) working group at the IETF. The problem is defined and | Authentication Protocol (EAP) working group at the IETF. The problem | |||
| divided into subproblems, and some constraints for possible solutions | is defined and divided into subproblems, and some constraints for | |||
| are outlined. The document presents also some existing mechanisms | possible solutions are outlined. The document presents also some | |||
| which help solve at least parts of the problem, and gives some | existing mechanisms which help solve at least parts of the problem, | |||
| suggestions on how to proceed for the rest. | and gives some suggestions on how to proceed for the rest. | |||
| Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
| 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
| 2. Problem Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 2. Problem Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 2.1 Access Network Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 2.1 Access Network Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 2.1.1 Issues with Access Network Discovery . . . . . . 5 | 2.2 Identity selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 2.2 Identity selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 2.3 AAA routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| 2.3 AAA routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 2.3.1 The Incomplete Routing Table Problem . . . 8 | |||
| 2.3.1 Issues with AAA Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 2.3.2 The User Selection Problem . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 2.4 Payload Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | 2.4 Payload Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
| 2.4.1 Issues with Payload Routing . . . . . . . . . . 10 | 2.4.1 Issues with Payload Routing . . . . . . . 10 | |||
| 2.5 Discovery, Decision, and Selection . . . . . . . . . . 11 | 2.5 Discovery, Decision, and Selection . . . . . . . . . 11 | |||
| 2.6 Type of Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 2.6 Type of Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
| 3. Design Constrains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | 3. Design Constrains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | |||
| 4. Existing Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 4. Existing Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | |||
| 4.1 IETF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 4.1 IETF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | |||
| 4.2 IEEE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 4.2 IEEE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 4.3 3GPP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | 4.3 3GPP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 4.4 Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | 4.4 Other . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
| 5. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 5. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | |||
| Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | |||
| Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | 7.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | |||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 | 7.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | |||
| A. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 | Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 | |||
| B. Modifications from Version 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 | A. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 | |||
| Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . 29 | B. Modifications from Version 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 | |||
| Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . 30 | ||||
| 1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
| The so called network discovery and selection problem affects network | The so called network discovery and selection problem affects network | |||
| access and wireless access networks in particular. This problem comes | access and wireless access networks in particular. This problem | |||
| relevant when any of the following conditions are true: | comes relevant when any of the following conditions are true: | |||
| o There is more than one available network attachment point, and the | o There is more than one available network attachment point, and the | |||
| different points may have different characteristics. | different points may have different characteristics. | |||
| o The user has multiple sets of credentials. For instance, the user | o The user has multiple sets of credentials. For instance, the user | |||
| could have one set of credentials from a public service provider | could have one set of credentials from a public service provider | |||
| and another set from his company. | and another set from his company. | |||
| o There is more than one way to provide roaming between the access | o There is more than one way to provide roaming between the access | |||
| and home network, and service parameters or pricing differs | and home network, and service parameters or pricing differs | |||
| between them. For instance, the access network could have both a | between them. For instance, the access network could have both a | |||
| direct relationship with the home network and an indirect | direct relationship with the home network and an indirect | |||
| relationship through a roaming consortium. | relationship through a roaming consortium. | |||
| o The roaming relationships between access and home networks are so | o The roaming relationships between access and home networks are so | |||
| complicated that current AAA protocols can not route the requests | complicated that current AAA protocols can not route the requests | |||
| to the home network unaided, just based on the domain in the given | to the home network unaided, just based on the domain in the given | |||
| Network Access Identifier (NAI) [4, 14]. | Network Access Identifier (NAI) [4, 19]. | |||
| o Payload packets get routed or tunneled differently, based on which | o Payload packets get routed or tunneled differently, based on which | |||
| particular roaming relationship variation is used. This may have | particular roaming relationship variation is used. This may have | |||
| an impact on the available services or their pricing. | an impact on the available services or their pricing. | |||
| o Providers share the same infrastructure, such as wireless access | o Providers share the same infrastructure, such as wireless access | |||
| points. | points. | |||
| The network discovery and selection problem spans multiple protocol | The network discovery and selection problem spans multiple protocol | |||
| layers and has been the subject of discussions in IETF, 3GPP, and | layers and has been the subject of discussions in IETF, 3GPP, and | |||
| skipping to change at page 4, line 29 | skipping to change at page 4, line 29 | |||
| figuring out how to route the authentication conversation | figuring out how to route the authentication conversation | |||
| originating from the selected identity back to the home realm. | originating from the selected identity back to the home realm. | |||
| o Finally, there is the the problem of "Payload routing" which | o Finally, there is the the problem of "Payload routing" which | |||
| involves figuring how the payload packets are routed, where more | involves figuring how the payload packets are routed, where more | |||
| advanced mechanisms than destination-based routing is needed. | advanced mechanisms than destination-based routing is needed. | |||
| Alternatively, the problem can be divided to the discovery, decision, | Alternatively, the problem can be divided to the discovery, decision, | |||
| and the selection components. The AAA routing problem, for instance, | and the selection components. The AAA routing problem, for instance, | |||
| involves all components: discovery (which mediating networks are | involves all components: discovery (which mediating networks are | |||
| available?), decision (choose the "best" one), and selection (this is | available?), decision (choose the "best" one), and selection (client | |||
| the chosen network) components. | tells the network which mediting network it has decided to choose) | |||
| components. | ||||
| 2.1 Access Network Discovery | 2.1 Access Network Discovery | |||
| The Access Network Discovery problem has been extensively studied, | The Access Network Discovery problem has been extensively studied, | |||
| see for instance the results of the IETF Seamoby WG, IEEE | see for instance the results of the IETF Seamoby WG, IEEE | |||
| specifications on 802.11 wireless LAN beaconing and probing process, | specifications on 802.11 wireless LAN beaconing and probing process, | |||
| studies (such as [38]) on the effectiveness of these mechanisms, and | studies (such as [38]) on the effectiveness of these mechanisms, and | |||
| so on. | so on. | |||
| Traditionally, the problem of discovering available networks has been | Traditionally, the problem of discovering available networks has been | |||
| skipping to change at page 5, line 15 | skipping to change at page 5, line 16 | |||
| In IEEE 802.11 WLANs, the Beacon/Probe Request/Response mechanism | In IEEE 802.11 WLANs, the Beacon/Probe Request/Response mechanism | |||
| provides a way for Stations to discover Access Points (APs), as well | provides a way for Stations to discover Access Points (APs), as well | |||
| as the capabilities of those APs. Among the Information Elements | as the capabilities of those APs. Among the Information Elements | |||
| (IEs) included within the Beacon and Probe Response is the SSID, a | (IEs) included within the Beacon and Probe Response is the SSID, a | |||
| non-unique identifier of the network to which an Access Point is | non-unique identifier of the network to which an Access Point is | |||
| attached. By combining network identification along with | attached. By combining network identification along with | |||
| capabilities discovery, the Beacon/Probe facility provides the | capabilities discovery, the Beacon/Probe facility provides the | |||
| information required for both network discovery and roaming decisions | information required for both network discovery and roaming decisions | |||
| within a single mechanism. | within a single mechanism. | |||
| 2.1.1 Issues with Access Network Discovery | ||||
| As noted in [37], the IEEE 802.11 Beacon mechanism does not scale | As noted in [37], the IEEE 802.11 Beacon mechanism does not scale | |||
| well; with a Beacon interval of 100ms, and 10 APs in the vicinity, | well; with a Beacon interval of 100ms, and 10 APs in the vicinity, | |||
| approximately 32 percent of an 802.11b AP's capacity is used for | approximately 32 percent of an 802.11b AP's capacity is used for | |||
| beacon transmission. In addition, since Beacon/Probe Response frames | beacon transmission. In addition, since Beacon/Probe Response frames | |||
| are sent by each AP over the wireless medium, stations can only | are sent by each AP over the wireless medium, stations can only | |||
| discover APs within range, which implies substantial coverage overlap | discover APs within range, which implies substantial coverage overlap | |||
| for roaming to occur without interruption. | for roaming to occur without interruption. | |||
| A number of enhancements have been proposed to the Beacon/Probe | A number of enhancements have been proposed to the Beacon/Probe | |||
| Response mechanism in order to improve scalability and roaming | Response mechanism in order to improve scalability and roaming | |||
| performance. These include allowing APs to announce capabilities of | performance. These include allowing APs to announce capabilities of | |||
| neighbor APs as well as their own, as proposed in IEEE 802.11k; | neighbor APs as well as their own, as proposed in IEEE 802.11k; | |||
| propagation of discovery information over IP, as handled in the CARD | propagation of discovery information over IP, as handled in the CARD | |||
| protocol developed within the IETF SEAMOBY WG, etc. | protocol developed within the IETF SEAMOBY WG, etc. | |||
| Typically scalability enhancement mechanisms attempt to get around | Typically scalability enhancement mechanisms attempt to get around | |||
| Beacon/Probe Response restrictions by sending advertisements at the | Beacon/Probe Response restrictions by sending advertisements at the | |||
| higher rates which are enabled one the station has associated with an | higher rates which are enabled one the station has associated with an | |||
| AP. Since these mechanisms run over IP, they can utilize IP | AP. Since these mechanisms run over IP, they can utilize IP | |||
| facilities such as fragmentation, which the link layer mechanisms may | facilities such as fragmentation, which the link layer mechanisms may | |||
| not always be able to do. For instance, in IEEE 802.11, Beacon frames | not always be able to do. For instance, in IEEE 802.11, Beacon | |||
| cannot use fragmentation because they are multicast frames, and | frames cannot use fragmentation because they are multicast frames, | |||
| multicast frames are not acknowledged in 802.11. | and multicast frames are not acknowledged in 802.11. | |||
| Another issue with the Beacon/Probe Request/Response mechanism is | ||||
| that it is either insecure or its security can be assured only after | ||||
| already attaching to this particular network. | ||||
| 2.2 Identity selection | 2.2 Identity selection | |||
| As networks proliferate, it becomes more and more likely that a given | As networks proliferate, it becomes more and more likely that a given | |||
| EAP peer may have multiple identities and credential sets, available | EAP peer may have multiple identities and credential sets, available | |||
| for use in different situations. For example, the EAP peer may have | for use in different situations. For example, the EAP peer may have | |||
| an account with one or more Public WLAN providers; a corporate WLAN; | an account with one or more Public WLAN providers; a corporate WLAN; | |||
| one or more wireless WAN providers. As a result, the EAP peer has to | one or more wireless WAN providers. As a result, the EAP peer has to | |||
| decide which credential set to use when presented with a given set of | decide which credential set to use when presented with a given set of | |||
| potential EAP authenticators. | potential EAP authenticators. | |||
| skipping to change at page 6, line 38 | skipping to change at page 6, line 40 | |||
| Traditionally, hints useful in identity selection have also been | Traditionally, hints useful in identity selection have also been | |||
| provided out-of-band. For example, via the RFC 3017 XML DTD [8], a | provided out-of-band. For example, via the RFC 3017 XML DTD [8], a | |||
| client can select between potential POPs, and then based on | client can select between potential POPs, and then based on | |||
| information provided in the DTD, determine the appropriate NAI to use | information provided in the DTD, determine the appropriate NAI to use | |||
| with the selected POP. | with the selected POP. | |||
| Perhaps the most typical case is a link layer that provides some | Perhaps the most typical case is a link layer that provides some | |||
| information about the network before EAP is initiated. For instance, | information about the network before EAP is initiated. For instance, | |||
| in IEEE 802.11 provides the SSID, though in some cases the client may | in IEEE 802.11 provides the SSID, though in some cases the client may | |||
| not learn about all the SSIDs supported by the given access point. In | not learn about all the SSIDs supported by the given access point. | |||
| IKEv2 [19], the identity of the responder (typically the security | In IKEv2 [18], the identity of the responder (typically the security | |||
| gateway) is provided in the same packet as the EAP Identity Request | gateway) is provided as a part of the usual IKEv2 exchange. | |||
| is transported. In order to use this information in deciding the | ||||
| right identity to use, the provided information has to either match | In order to use this information in deciding the right identity to | |||
| with one of the client's home networks, or the client has to have | use, the provided information has to either match with one of the | |||
| some other knowledge that enables to link the advertised network and | client's home networks, or the client has to have some other | |||
| the home network. For instance, the client may be aware that his home | knowledge that enables to link the advertised network and the home | |||
| network has a roaming contract with a given access network. | network. For instance, the client may be aware that his home network | |||
| has a roaming contract with a given access network. | ||||
| It is also possible for hints to be embedded within credentials. In | It is also possible for hints to be embedded within credentials. In | |||
| [11], usage hints are provided within certificates used for wireless | [11], usage hints are provided within certificates used for wireless | |||
| authentication. This involves extending the client's certificate to | authentication. This involves extending the client's certificate to | |||
| include the SSIDs with which the certificate can be used. | include the SSIDs with which the certificate can be used. | |||
| Finally, some EAP implementations use the space after the NUL | Finally, some EAP implementations use the space after the NUL | |||
| character in an EAP Identity Request to communicate some parameters | character in an EAP Identity Request to communicate some parameters | |||
| relating to the network requesting EAP authentication. However, there | relating to the network requesting EAP authentication. While there | |||
| is no standard interpretation of the field beyond the NUL character. | is Standards Track RFC specifying the interpretation of the field | |||
| beyond the NUL character, [12] is widely expected to be used. | ||||
| 2.3 AAA routing | 2.3 AAA routing | |||
| Once the identity has been selected, it is necessary for the | Once the identity has been selected, it is necessary for the | |||
| authentication conversation to be routed back to the home realm. | authentication conversation to be routed back to the home realm. | |||
| This is typically done today through the use of the Network Access | This is typically done today through the use of the Network Access | |||
| Identifier (NAI), RFC 2486 [4, 14], and the ability of the AAA | Identifier (NAI), RFC 2486 [4, 19], and the ability of the AAA | |||
| network to route requests to the domain indicated in the NAI. | network to route requests to the domain indicated in the NAI. | |||
| Within the IETF ROAMOPS WG, a number of additional approaches were | Within the IETF ROAMOPS WG, a number of additional approaches were | |||
| considered for this, including source routing techniques based on the | considered for this, including source routing techniques based on the | |||
| NAI, and techniques relying on the AAA infrastructure. Given the | NAI, and techniques relying on the AAA infrastructure. Given the | |||
| relative simplicity of the roaming implementations described in RFC | relative simplicity of the roaming implementations described in RFC | |||
| 2194 [3], static routing mechanisms appeared adequate for the task | 2194 [3], static routing mechanisms appeared adequate for the task | |||
| and it was not deemed necessary to develop dynamic routing protocols. | and it was not deemed necessary to develop dynamic routing protocols. | |||
| As noted in RFC 2607 [5], RADIUS proxies are deployed not only for | As noted in RFC 2607 [5], RADIUS proxies are deployed not only for | |||
| skipping to change at page 8, line 5 | skipping to change at page 8, line 10 | |||
| technologies, such as UUCP and FidoNet, and email-address based | technologies, such as UUCP and FidoNet, and email-address based | |||
| source-routing was used to handle this. However, as mail could | source-routing was used to handle this. However, as mail could | |||
| increasingly be delivered directly, the use of source routing | increasingly be delivered directly, the use of source routing | |||
| disappeared. | disappeared. | |||
| As with the selection of certificates by stations, a Diameter client | As with the selection of certificates by stations, a Diameter client | |||
| wishing to authenticate with a Diameter server may have a choice of | wishing to authenticate with a Diameter server may have a choice of | |||
| available certificates, and therefore it may need to choose between | available certificates, and therefore it may need to choose between | |||
| them. | them. | |||
| 2.3.1 Issues with AAA Routing | 2.3.1 The Incomplete Routing Table Problem | |||
| No dynamic routing protocols are in use in AAA infrastructure today. | No dynamic routing protocols are in use in AAA infrastructure today. | |||
| This implies that there has to be a device (such as a proxy) within | This implies that there has to be a device (such as a proxy) within | |||
| the access network that knows how to route to different domains, even | the access network that knows how to route to different domains, even | |||
| if they are further than one hop away, as shown in Figure 2. In this | if they are further than one hop away, as shown in Figure 2. In this | |||
| figure, the user "joe@corp3.com" has to be authenticated through ISP | figure, the user "joe@corp3.com" has to be authenticated through ISP | |||
| 2, since the domain "corp3.com" is served by it. | 2, since the domain "corp3.com" is served by it. | |||
| +---------+ +---------+ | +---------+ +---------+ | |||
| | | | | | | | | | | |||
| skipping to change at page 8, line 31 | skipping to change at page 8, line 36 | |||
| | | | | |||
| \|/ | \|/ | |||
| +---------+ | +---------+ | |||
| | |--------> "corp2.com" | | |--------> "corp2.com" | |||
| | ISP 2 | | | ISP 2 | | |||
| | |--------> "corp3.com" | | |--------> "corp3.com" | |||
| +---------+ | +---------+ | |||
| Figure 2: AAA routing problem | Figure 2: AAA routing problem | |||
| 2.3.2 The User Selection Problem | ||||
| A related issue is that the roaming relationship graph may have | A related issue is that the roaming relationship graph may have | |||
| ambiguous routes, as shown in Figure 3. As billing is based on AAA | ambiguous routes, as shown in Figure 3. As billing is based on AAA | |||
| and pricing may be based on the used intermediaries, it is necessary | and pricing may be based on the used intermediaries, it is necessary | |||
| to select which route is used. For instance, in Figure 3, access | to select which route is used. For instance, in Figure 3, access | |||
| through the roaming group 1 may be cheaper, than if roaming group 2 | through the roaming group 1 may be cheaper, than if roaming group 2 | |||
| is used. For commercial reasons, intermediaries want to participate | is used. For commercial reasons, intermediaries want to participate | |||
| the AAA transaction. | the AAA transaction. | |||
| +---------+ | +---------+ | |||
| | |---------> "isp1.com" | | |---------> "isp1.com" | |||
| skipping to change at page 10, line 6 | skipping to change at page 10, line 6 | |||
| An additional issue is that even if the intermediaries are | An additional issue is that even if the intermediaries are | |||
| legitimate, they could be switched. For instance, an access network | legitimate, they could be switched. For instance, an access network | |||
| could advertise that it has a deal with cheapintermediary.net, and | could advertise that it has a deal with cheapintermediary.net, and | |||
| then switch the user's selection to priceyintermediary.com instead. | then switch the user's selection to priceyintermediary.com instead. | |||
| To make this relevant, the pricing would have to be based on the | To make this relevant, the pricing would have to be based on the | |||
| intermediary. Even if it were possible to secure this selection, it | intermediary. Even if it were possible to secure this selection, it | |||
| would not be possible to guarantee that QoS or other properties | would not be possible to guarantee that QoS or other properties | |||
| claimed by the network were indeed provided. As a result, it may be | claimed by the network were indeed provided. As a result, it may be | |||
| useful to think of the intermediary selection only as a hint. | useful to think of the intermediary selection only as a hint. | |||
| Only a limited amount of information about AAA routes can be | Only a limited amount of information about AAA routes or pricing | |||
| dynamically communicated. It is necessary to retrieve network and | information can be dynamically communicated [42]. It is necessary to | |||
| intermediary names, but quality of service or pricing information is | retrieve network and intermediary names, but quality of service or | |||
| clearly something that would need to be pre-provisioned, or perhaps | pricing information is clearly something that would need to be | |||
| just available via the web. Similarly, dynamic communication of | pre-provisioned, or perhaps just available via the web. Similarly, | |||
| network names can not be expected to provide all possible home | dynamic communication of network names can not be expected to provide | |||
| network names, as their number can be quite large globally. | all possible home network names, as their number can be quite large | |||
| globally. | ||||
| As a result, network-based AAA routing mechanisms are preferred over | ||||
| user-based selection where sufficient routes have been configured and | ||||
| there is no need for user control. Where these conditions are not | ||||
| met -- particularly when an attempt to use the network-based routing | ||||
| mechanism has failed -- routing hints can be placed in an NAI as | ||||
| defined in [4, 19]. Where NAIs are used in this manner, the AAA | ||||
| routing problem becomes a subset of the identifier selection problem. | ||||
| 2.4 Payload Routing | 2.4 Payload Routing | |||
| The access network, mediating AAA infrastructure, and the home | The access network, mediating AAA infrastructure, and the home | |||
| network may all have a desire to affect the kind of treatment payload | network may all have a desire to affect the kind of treatment payload | |||
| packets get. This includes filtering, prioritization, routing paths, | packets get. This includes filtering, prioritization, routing paths, | |||
| and mandatory tunneling. | and mandatory tunneling. | |||
| Traditionally, the involved entities have been able to provide some | Traditionally, the involved entities have been able to provide some | |||
| control of this through AAA protocols such as RADIUS [6] and Diameter | control of this through AAA protocols such as RADIUS [6] and Diameter | |||
| [9]. RFC 2868 [7] defines tunneling attributes that the home and | [9]. RFC 2868 [7] defines tunneling attributes that the home and | |||
| mediating networks can use to establish mandatory tunneling at the | mediating networks can use to establish mandatory tunneling at the | |||
| access network. RFC 3588 [9] defines a filter syntax which can be | access network. RFC 3588 [9] defines a filter syntax which can be | |||
| used to install per-session filters under the control of AAA. | used to install per-session filters under the control of AAA. | |||
| 2.4.1 Issues with Payload Routing | 2.4.1 Issues with Payload Routing | |||
| In an attack described by Michael Richardson, a rogue hotspot | In an attack described by Michael Richardson, a rogue hotspot | |||
| operator (but with a legitimate roaming relationship to a home | operator (but with a legitimate roaming relationship to a home | |||
| network) steals revenues from local hotspot operator by spoofing its | network) steals revenues from local hotspot operator by spoofing its | |||
| identity. The rogue operator places a node with two interfaces in the | identity. The rogue operator places a node with two interfaces in | |||
| coverage area of the local operator, and attaches to the Internet via | the coverage area of the local operator, and attaches to the Internet | |||
| this operator using a flat fee -based account. It then starts to | via this operator using a flat fee -based account. It then starts to | |||
| advertise itself as a hotspot operator on the other interface, luring | advertise itself as a hotspot operator on the other interface, luring | |||
| unsuspecting clients to use this node rather the than the local | unsuspecting clients to use this node rather the than the local | |||
| operator. The users authenticate via this node and its roaming | operator. The users authenticate via this node and its roaming | |||
| relationship. All AAA and payload traffic goes via the local hotspot, | relationship. All AAA and payload traffic goes via the local | |||
| suitably NATted by the rogue node. As a result, the rogue operator | hotspot, suitably NATted by the rogue node. As a result, the rogue | |||
| gets the roaming service fees for a number of clients, whereas the | operator gets the roaming service fees for a number of clients, | |||
| local operator gets just one client. | whereas the local operator gets just one client. | |||
| Due to the way that the IEEE 802.11, IETF protocols, and common EAP | Due to the way that the IEEE 802.11, IETF protocols, and common EAP | |||
| methods have been designed, the rogue operator can actually advertise | methods have been designed, the rogue operator can actually advertise | |||
| the same identity (SSID) as the local operator; the parameters | the same identity (SSID) as the local operator; the parameters | |||
| advertised by the access point information are not authenticated | advertised by the access point information are not authenticated | |||
| end-to-end to the home network. EAP methods that support channel | end-to-end to the home network. EAP methods that support channel | |||
| bindings [10] do not have this problem, but this support is not | bindings [10] do not have this problem, but this support is not | |||
| present in commonly used methods. Rogue access point can present a | present in commonly used methods. Rogue access point can present a | |||
| different set of parameters to the client and to the home network. | different set of parameters to the client and to the home network. | |||
| The current network access mechanisms enable us to have | The current network access mechanisms enable us to have | |||
| skipping to change at page 11, line 19 | skipping to change at page 11, line 28 | |||
| number of times. | number of times. | |||
| We call this the "payload route binding problem". In this problem, | We call this the "payload route binding problem". In this problem, | |||
| authentication and link layer support do not guarantee that the | authentication and link layer support do not guarantee that the | |||
| packets are actually routed through the path that appears to have | packets are actually routed through the path that appears to have | |||
| been offered. Basically, if the "rogue" access point has a flat fee | been offered. Basically, if the "rogue" access point has a flat fee | |||
| account and a contract with a clearing house, it can offer access to | account and a contract with a clearing house, it can offer access to | |||
| anyone with a per-byte account, NAT their packets, and send the | anyone with a per-byte account, NAT their packets, and send the | |||
| traffic forward on its own account, and generate income. The local | traffic forward on its own account, and generate income. The local | |||
| ISP would not be able to detect this by looking at the traffic | ISP would not be able to detect this by looking at the traffic | |||
| stream. The user would not be able to detect it either, unless an EAP | stream. The user would not be able to detect it either, unless an | |||
| method with channel binding support is used. And even if it is, the | EAP method with channel binding support is used. And even if it is, | |||
| user may not care about the identity of the access point enough to | the user may not care about the identity of the access point enough | |||
| look at it; channel bindings can only ensure that all parties agree | to look at it; channel bindings can only ensure that all parties | |||
| about the parameters, not that they make sense. | agree about the parameters, not that they make sense. | |||
| The working group did not come to a conclusion whether this attack | The working group did not come to a conclusion whether this attack | |||
| needs to be prevented. Some of the proposed solutions include the use | needs to be prevented. Some of the proposed solutions include the | |||
| of EAP EMSK in the authentication exchange with the DHCP server, or | use of EAP EMSK in the authentication exchange with the DHCP server, | |||
| the use of EAP to provide the certificates that SEND requires for the | or the use of EAP to provide the certificates that SEND requires for | |||
| authentication of Router Advertisements. Either approach means that | the authentication of Router Advertisements. Either approach means | |||
| we are sure we are speaking at layer 3 to the services that we | that we are sure we are speaking at layer 3 to the services that we | |||
| authenticated at layer two. However, this does not prevent an | authenticated at layer two. However, this does not prevent an | |||
| attacker from offering such services, and then performing a NAT on | attacker from offering such services, and then performing a NAT on | |||
| the packets later. However, IPsec could be used to detect the | the packets later. However, IPsec could be used to detect the | |||
| presence of such NATs, even if NAT traversal is in use. | presence of such NATs, even if NAT traversal is in use. | |||
| 2.5 Discovery, Decision, and Selection | 2.5 Discovery, Decision, and Selection | |||
| An alternative decomposition of the problem is to consider the | An alternative decomposition of the problem is to consider the | |||
| discovery, decision, and selection aspects separately. Discovery | discovery, decision, and selection aspects separately. Discovery | |||
| consists of discovering access networks and associated POPs, | consists of discovering access networks and associated POPs, | |||
| discovering what identities the access networks will accept (either | discovering what identities the access networks will accept (either | |||
| directly or through roaming relationships), and discovering which | directly or through roaming relationships), and discovering which | |||
| potential AAA intermediaries or routes exist. | potential AAA intermediaries or routes exist. | |||
| Selection consists of attaching to the "right" access network and | Selection consists of attaching to the "right" access network and | |||
| POP, offering an identity through EAP Identity Response, and | POP, offering an identity through EAP Identity Response, and | |||
| providing a hint about the desired AAA intermediary. The selection of | providing a hint about the desired AAA intermediary. The selection | |||
| the AAA intermediary, along with the home and access networks, | of the AAA intermediary, along with the home and access networks, | |||
| determines also the treatment of payload packets. | determines also the treatment of payload packets. | |||
| Decision can be either manual selection or automatic. Most likely, | Decision can be either manual selection or automatic. Most likely, | |||
| automatic mechanisms are preferred, even if manual selection should | automatic mechanisms are preferred, even if manual selection should | |||
| be retained as a fallback. The type of the decision also places | be retained as a fallback. The type of the decision also places | |||
| additional requirements on the type of information that the discovery | additional requirements on the type of information that the discovery | |||
| phase must provide. Just knowing which choices are available is | phase must provide. Just knowing which choices are available is | |||
| probably enough for manual selection. Unfortunately, automatic | probably enough for manual selection. Unfortunately, automatic | |||
| selection based on a list of choices is by itself not possible: | selection based on a list of choices is by itself not possible: | |||
| o Some access networks may be preferred over others. For instance, | o Some access networks may be preferred over others. For instance, | |||
| the user's private corporate network may be preferred over a | the user's private corporate network may be preferred over a | |||
| public network due to cost and efficiency reasons. | public network due to cost and efficiency reasons. | |||
| o Similarly, some credentials may be preferred over others. | o Similarly, some credentials may be preferred over others. | |||
| o Use of an access network with direct connection to home network | o Use of an access network with direct connection to home network | |||
| may be preferred over using mediating networks. | may be preferred over using mediating networks. | |||
| o Some mediating networks may be preferred to others, most likely | o Some mediating networks may be preferred to others, most likely | |||
| based on cost. Note that optimizing cost is not a trivial problem, | based on cost. Note that optimizing cost is not a trivial | |||
| because the total cost may be a combination of a fixed fee, | problem, because the total cost may be a combination of a fixed | |||
| per-minute, per-megabyte, volume discounts, and so on. | fee, per-minute, per-megabyte, volume discounts, and so on. | |||
| o Preferences may come from the user, his or her employer (who's | o Preferences may come from the user, his or her employer (who's | |||
| paying the bill), home network, or access network. | paying the bill), home network, or access network. | |||
| Different discovery mechanisms can accommodate such preferences in | Different discovery mechanisms can accommodate such preferences in | |||
| various ways. Some user input or perhaps a pre-provisioned database | various ways. Some user input or perhaps a pre-provisioned database | |||
| seems inevitable. | seems inevitable. | |||
| Finally, while the final step of choosing a new network lies always | Finally, while the final step of choosing a new network lies always | |||
| on the client side, different approches vary in how much they rely on | on the client side, different approches vary in how much they rely on | |||
| skipping to change at page 12, line 47 | skipping to change at page 13, line 7 | |||
| instructions that the network gives to the client about the | instructions that the network gives to the client about the | |||
| appropriate base station(s) that should be used. Most of the | appropriate base station(s) that should be used. Most of the | |||
| processing and decisions are performed on the network side. In | processing and decisions are performed on the network side. In | |||
| contrast, in a completely client-driven approach the client may get | contrast, in a completely client-driven approach the client may get | |||
| some raw information from the network, but makes all decisions by | some raw information from the network, but makes all decisions by | |||
| itself. | itself. | |||
| 2.6 Type of Information | 2.6 Type of Information | |||
| A third alternative way to decompose the problem is to analyze the | A third alternative way to decompose the problem is to analyze the | |||
| type of information which is required [16]. For instance, access | type of information which is required [15]. For instance, access | |||
| network discovery may benefit from getting knowledge about the | network discovery may benefit from getting knowledge about the | |||
| quality of service available from a particular access network or | quality of service available from a particular access network or | |||
| node, and AAA routing may require knowledge of roaming agreements. | node, and AAA routing may require knowledge of roaming agreements. | |||
| References [16] and [30] describe the following categories of | References [15] and [30] describe the following categories of | |||
| information which can be discovered: | information which can be discovered: | |||
| o Access network identification | o Access network identification | |||
| o Roaming agreements | o Roaming agreements | |||
| o Authentication mechanisms | o Authentication mechanisms | |||
| o Quality of service | o Quality of service | |||
| o Cost | o Cost | |||
| o Authorization policy | o Authorization policy | |||
| o Privacy policy | o Privacy policy | |||
| o Service parameters, such as the existence of middleboxes | o Service parameters, such as the existence of middleboxes | |||
| The nature of the discovered information can be static, such as the | The nature of the discovered information can be static, such as the | |||
| fastest available transmission speed on a given piece of equipment. | fastest available transmission speed on a given piece of equipment. | |||
| Or it can be dynamic, such as the current load on this equipment. The | Or it can be dynamic, such as the current load on this equipment. | |||
| information can describe something about the network access nodes | The information can describe something about the network access nodes | |||
| themselves, or it can be something that they simply advertise on | themselves, or it can be something that they simply advertise on | |||
| behalf of other parts of the network, such as roaming agreements | behalf of other parts of the network, such as roaming agreements | |||
| further in the AAA network. | further in the AAA network. | |||
| Typically, it would be desirable to acquire all this information | Typically, it would be desirable to acquire all this information | |||
| prior to the authentication process. In some cases it is in fact | prior to the authentication process. In some cases it is in fact | |||
| necessary, if the authentication process can not complete without the | necessary, if the authentication process can not complete without the | |||
| information. Reference [30] classifies the possible steps at which | information. Reference [30] classifies the possible steps at which | |||
| IEEE 802.11 networks can acquire this information: | IEEE 802.11 networks can acquire this information: | |||
| skipping to change at page 13, line 36 | skipping to change at page 13, line 38 | |||
| behalf of other parts of the network, such as roaming agreements | behalf of other parts of the network, such as roaming agreements | |||
| further in the AAA network. | further in the AAA network. | |||
| Typically, it would be desirable to acquire all this information | Typically, it would be desirable to acquire all this information | |||
| prior to the authentication process. In some cases it is in fact | prior to the authentication process. In some cases it is in fact | |||
| necessary, if the authentication process can not complete without the | necessary, if the authentication process can not complete without the | |||
| information. Reference [30] classifies the possible steps at which | information. Reference [30] classifies the possible steps at which | |||
| IEEE 802.11 networks can acquire this information: | IEEE 802.11 networks can acquire this information: | |||
| o Pre-association | o Pre-association | |||
| o Post-association (or pre-authentication) | o Post-association (or pre-authentication) | |||
| o Post-authentication | o Post-authentication | |||
| Note that some EAP methods (such as those defined in [21, 23, 15]) | Note that some EAP methods (such as those defined in [21, 23, 14]) | |||
| have an ability to agree about additional parameters during an | have an ability to agree about additional parameters during an | |||
| authentication process. While such parameters are useful for many | authentication process. While such parameters are useful for many | |||
| purposes, their use for network selection suffers from an obvious | purposes, their use for network selection suffers from an obvious | |||
| chicken-and-egg problem. Or at least it seems costly to run a | chicken-and-egg problem. Or at least it seems costly to run a | |||
| relatively heavy authentication process to decide whether the client | relatively heavy authentication process to decide whether the client | |||
| wants to attach to this network. | wants to attach to this network. | |||
| 3. Design Constrains | 3. Design Constrains | |||
| All solutions to the network selection and discovery problem must | All solutions to the network selection and discovery problem must | |||
| skipping to change at page 15, line 18 | skipping to change at page 15, line 18 | |||
| There has already been a lot of past work in this area, including a | There has already been a lot of past work in this area, including a | |||
| number of IETF Proposed Standards generated by the ROAMOPS WG. The | number of IETF Proposed Standards generated by the ROAMOPS WG. The | |||
| topic of roaming was considered different enough from both AAA and | topic of roaming was considered different enough from both AAA and | |||
| access protocols such as PPP that it deserved its own WG. | access protocols such as PPP that it deserved its own WG. | |||
| In addition to work on ROAMOPS directly relating to the problem, | In addition to work on ROAMOPS directly relating to the problem, | |||
| there has been work in SEAMOBY relating to scaling of network | there has been work in SEAMOBY relating to scaling of network | |||
| discovery mechanisms; work in PKIX relating to identity and | discovery mechanisms; work in PKIX relating to identity and | |||
| credential selection; and work in AAA WG relating to access routing. | credential selection; and work in AAA WG relating to access routing. | |||
| The PANA protocol [18] has a mechanism to advertise and select "ISPs" | The PANA protocol [17] has a mechanism to advertise and select "ISPs" | |||
| through the exchange of the ISP-Information AVP in its initial | through the exchange of the ISP-Information AVP in its initial | |||
| exchange. | exchange. | |||
| A number of (small) improvements to payload routing control are | A number of (small) improvements to payload routing control are | |||
| currently in progress in the IETF RADEXT WG. These include better | currently in progress in the IETF RADEXT WG. These include better | |||
| filtering and redirection support [20]. RADEXT WG is also working on | filtering and redirection support [20]. RADEXT WG is also working on | |||
| an new revision of the NAI specification [14]. This revision | an new revision of the NAI specification [19]. This revision | |||
| clarifies the use of the '!' syntax in a NAI to route requests via | clarifies the use of the '!' syntax in a NAI to route requests via | |||
| specified mediating networks. | specified mediating networks. | |||
| Adrangi et al [12] discuss the use of the EAP-Request/Identity for | Adrangi et al [12] discuss the use of the EAP-Request/Identity for | |||
| network discovery. As noted in [10] Section 3.1, the minimum EAP MTU | identifier selection. It is necessary to have this kind of a | |||
| is 1020 octets, so that an EAP-Request/Identity is only guaranteed to | mechanism, as clients may have more than one credential, and when | |||
| be able to include 1015 octets within the Type-Data field. Since RFC | combined with the '!' syntax for NAIs, it can also be used for | |||
| 1035 [1] enables FQDNs to be up to 255 octets in length, this may not | mediating network discovery and selection. The use of lower-layer | |||
| enable the announcement of very many networks, although if SSIDs are | information may also be limited in terms of discovering identifiers | |||
| used, the maximum length of 32 octets per SSID may provide | that are used on the EAP layer. In the longer term, the use of this | |||
| substantially better scaling. The use of other network identifiers | mechanism may run into scalability problems, however. As noted in | |||
| than domain names is also possible, for instance the PANA protocol | [10] Section 3.1, the minimum EAP MTU is 1020 octets, so that an | |||
| uses an a free form string and an SMI Network Management Private | EAP-Request/Identity is only guaranteed to be able to include 1015 | |||
| Enterprise Code [18], or Mobile Network Codes could be used as hinted | octets within the Type-Data field. Since RFC 1035 [1] enables FQDNs | |||
| in [13]. | to be up to 255 octets in length, this may not enable the | |||
| announcement of many networks, although if SSIDs are used, the | ||||
| maximum length of 32 octets per SSID may provide somewhat better | ||||
| scaling. The use of other network identifiers than domain names is | ||||
| also possible, for instance the PANA protocol uses an a free form | ||||
| string and an SMI Network Management Private Enterprise Code [17], or | ||||
| Mobile Network Codes embedded in NAIs as specified in 3GPP. | ||||
| As noted in [39], the use of the EAP-Request/Identity for network | As noted in [39], the use of the EAP-Request/Identity for network | |||
| discovery has substantial negative impact on handoff latency, since | discovery has substantial negative impact on handoff latency, since | |||
| this may result in a station needing to initiate an EAP conversation | this may result in a station needing to initiate an EAP conversation | |||
| with each Access Point in order to receive an EAP-Request/Identity | with each Access Point in order to receive an EAP-Request/Identity | |||
| describing which networks are supported. Since IEEE 802.11-1999 does | describing which networks are supported. Since IEEE 802.11-1999 does | |||
| not support use of Class 1 data frames in State 1 (unauthenticated, | not support use of Class 1 data frames in State 1 (unauthenticated, | |||
| unassociated) within an ESS, this implies either that the APs must | unassociated) within an ESS, this implies either that the APs must | |||
| support 802.1X pre-authentication (optional in IEEE 802.11i) or that | support 802.1X pre-authentication (optional in IEEE 802.11i) or that | |||
| the station must associate with each AP prior to sending an | the station must associate with each AP prior to sending an | |||
| skipping to change at page 16, line 15 | skipping to change at page 16, line 21 | |||
| The effects to handoff latency depend also on the specific protocol | The effects to handoff latency depend also on the specific protocol | |||
| design, and the expected likelihood of having to provide | design, and the expected likelihood of having to provide | |||
| advertisements and initiate scanning of several access points. The | advertisements and initiate scanning of several access points. The | |||
| use of advertisements only as a last resort when the AAA routing has | use of advertisements only as a last resort when the AAA routing has | |||
| failed is a better approach than the use of advertisement - scanning | failed is a better approach than the use of advertisement - scanning | |||
| procedure on every attachment. | procedure on every attachment. | |||
| Furthermore, if the AP has not been updated to present an up to date | Furthermore, if the AP has not been updated to present an up to date | |||
| set of networks in the EAP-Requests/Identity, after associating to | set of networks in the EAP-Requests/Identity, after associating to | |||
| candidate APs and then choosing one, it is possible that the station | candidate APs and then choosing one, it is possible that the station | |||
| will find that the chosen network is not supported after all. In this | will find that the chosen network is not supported after all. In | |||
| case, the station's EAP-Response/Identity may be answered with an | this case, the station's EAP-Response/Identity may be answered with | |||
| updated EAP-Request/Identity, adding yet more latency. | an updated EAP-Request/Identity, adding more latency. | |||
| 4.2 IEEE | 4.2 IEEE | |||
| There has been work in IEEE 802.11 and 802.1 relating to network | There has been work in IEEE 802.11 and 802.1 relating to network | |||
| discovery enhancements. | discovery enhancements. | |||
| Some recent contributions in this space include the following: | Some recent contributions in this space include the following: | |||
| o [25] defines the Beacon and Probe Response mechanisms used with | o [25] defines the Beacon and Probe Response mechanisms used with | |||
| IEEE 802.11. Unfortunately, Beacons are only sent at the lowest | IEEE 802.11. Unfortunately, Beacons are only sent at the lowest | |||
| skipping to change at page 17, line 11 | skipping to change at page 17, line 17 | |||
| AP" appears at the MAC and IP layers to be distinct physical AP. | AP" appears at the MAC and IP layers to be distinct physical AP. | |||
| As noted in the paper, full compatibility with existing 802.11 | As noted in the paper, full compatibility with existing 802.11 | |||
| station implementations can only be maintained if each virtual AP | station implementations can only be maintained if each virtual AP | |||
| uses a distinct MAC address (BSSID) for use in Beacons and Probe | uses a distinct MAC address (BSSID) for use in Beacons and Probe | |||
| Responses. This draft does not discuss scaling issues in detail, | Responses. This draft does not discuss scaling issues in detail, | |||
| but recommends that only a limited number of virtual APs be | but recommends that only a limited number of virtual APs be | |||
| supported by a single physical access point. The simulations | supported by a single physical access point. The simulations | |||
| presented in [37] appear to confirm this conclusion; with a Beacon | presented in [37] appear to confirm this conclusion; with a Beacon | |||
| interval of 100 ms, once more than 8 virtual APs are supported on | interval of 100 ms, once more than 8 virtual APs are supported on | |||
| a single channel, more than 20% of bandwidth is used for Beacons | a single channel, more than 20% of bandwidth is used for Beacons | |||
| alone. This would indicate a limit of approximately 20 virtual APs | alone. This would indicate a limit of approximately 20 virtual | |||
| per physical AP. | APs per physical AP. | |||
| o The 802.11 WIEN Study Group is working on the network discovery | o The 802.11 WIEN Study Group is working on the network discovery | |||
| and selection problem. Some of the contributions in this group | and selection problem. In general, the group is working to define | |||
| include [31] and [30]. In general, the group is working to define | the problem at this stage. This includes studies on the | |||
| the problem at this point in time. This includes studies on the | ||||
| limitations of existing mechanisms, and gathering requirements | limitations of existing mechanisms, and gathering requirements | |||
| about the type of information needed from the discovery process. | about the type of information needed from the discovery process. | |||
| Some of the contributions in this group include [31] and [30]. | ||||
| o IEEE 802.21 is developing standards to enable handover and | o IEEE 802.21 is developing standards to enable handover and | |||
| interoperability between heterogeneous network types including | interoperability between heterogeneous network types including | |||
| both 802 and non 802 networks. The intention is to provide a | both 802 and non 802 networks. The intention is to provide a | |||
| general information transfer capability for these purposes. As a | general information transfer capability for these purposes. As a | |||
| result, network discovery process may benefit from such standards. | result, network discovery process may benefit from such standards. | |||
| 4.3 3GPP | 4.3 3GPP | |||
| The 3GPP technical specification [32] covers the interworking of WLAN | The 3GPP technical specification [32] covers the interworking of WLAN | |||
| networks with 2G and 3G networks. This specification discusses also | networks with 2G and 3G networks. This specification discusses also | |||
| network discovery and selection issues. | network discovery and selection issues. | |||
| The specification requires that Access Network Discovery is performed | The specification requires that Access Network Discovery is performed | |||
| as specified in the standards for the relevant WLAN link layer | as specified in the standards for the relevant WLAN link layer | |||
| technology. An early version of the technical specification required | technology. An early version of the technical specification required | |||
| the use of a 3GPP-specific SSID, but that has since then been | the use of a 3GPP-specific SSID, but that has since then been | |||
| abandoned; access network or local 3GPP network based SSIDs may be | abandoned; access network or local 3GPP network based SSIDs may be | |||
| used instead. It has not been decided whether some conventions on the | used instead. It has not been decided whether some conventions on | |||
| format of these SSIDs is required by 3GPP. | the format of these SSIDs is required by 3GPP. | |||
| In addition to Access Network Discovery, it is necessary to select | In addition to Access Network Discovery, it is necessary to select | |||
| intermediary networks for the purposes of AAA Routing. In 3GPP, these | intermediary networks for the purposes of AAA Routing. In 3GPP, | |||
| networks are called Visited Public Land-based Mobile Networks | these networks are called Visited Public Land-based Mobile Networks | |||
| (VPLMNs), and it is assumed that WLAN networks may have a contract | (VPLMNs), and it is assumed that WLAN networks may have a contract | |||
| with more than one VPLMN. GSM/UMTS roaming mechanisms are then | with more than one VPLMN. GSM/UMTS roaming mechanisms are then | |||
| employed for routing AAA requests from the VPLMN to the home network. | employed for routing AAA requests from the VPLMN to the home network. | |||
| In order to select the VPLMN, the following is required: | In order to select the VPLMN, the following is required: | |||
| o User can choose the desired VPLMN. | o User can choose the desired VPLMN. | |||
| o AAA message are routed according to the NAI. | o AAA message are routed according to the NAI. | |||
| o Existing EAP mechanisms are used where possible. | o Existing EAP mechanisms are used where possible. | |||
| o Extensibility is desired, to allow the advertisement of other | o Extensibility is desired, to allow the advertisement of other | |||
| parameters later. | parameters later. | |||
| The referenced 3GPP technical specification is a so called stage 2 | The referenced 3GPP technical specification is a so called stage 2 | |||
| specification, and contains only the principles of operation, leaving | specification, and contains only the principles of operation, leaving | |||
| detailed protocol work for later. Nevertheless, the specification | detailed protocol work for later. Nevertheless, the specification | |||
| states that advertisement information shall be provided only when the | states that advertisement information shall be provided only when the | |||
| access network is unable to route the request using normal AAA | access network is unable to route the request using normal AAA | |||
| routing means, such as when it sees an unknown NAI domain. It is also | routing means, such as when it sees an unknown NAI domain. It is | |||
| stated that where VPLMN control is required, the necessary | also stated that where VPLMN control is required, the necessary | |||
| information is added to a NAI. | information is added to a NAI. | |||
| The security properties related to different mediating network | The security properties related to different mediating network | |||
| selection mechanisms have been discussed in the 3GPP contribution | selection mechanisms have been discussed in the 3GPP contribution | |||
| [33], which concludes that both SSID- and EAP-based mechanisms have | [33], which concludes that both SSID- and EAP-based mechanisms have | |||
| roughly similar (and very limited) security properties, and that, as | roughly similar (and very limited) security properties, and that, as | |||
| a result, network advertisement should be considered only as hints. | a result, network advertisement should be considered only as hints. | |||
| Ahmavaara, Haverinen, and Pichna [35] discuss the new network | Ahmavaara, Haverinen, and Pichna [35] discuss the new network | |||
| selection requirements that 3G-WLAN roaming introduces. It is | selection requirements that 3G-WLAN roaming introduces. It is | |||
| skipping to change at page 18, line 47 | skipping to change at page 19, line 3 | |||
| [36] discusses the need for network selection in a situation where | [36] discusses the need for network selection in a situation where | |||
| there is more than one available access network with a roaming | there is more than one available access network with a roaming | |||
| agreement to the home network. It also lists EAP-level, SSID-based, | agreement to the home network. It also lists EAP-level, SSID-based, | |||
| and PEAP-based mechanisms as potential solutions to the network | and PEAP-based mechanisms as potential solutions to the network | |||
| selection problem. | selection problem. | |||
| Eijk et al [34] discussed the general issue of network selection. | Eijk et al [34] discussed the general issue of network selection. | |||
| They concentrated primarily on the Access Network Discovery problem, | They concentrated primarily on the Access Network Discovery problem, | |||
| based on various criteria, and did not consider the other aspects of | based on various criteria, and did not consider the other aspects of | |||
| the network selection problem. Nevertheless, they mention that one of | the network selection problem. Nevertheless, they mention that one | |||
| the network selection problems is that the information about | of the network selection problems is that the information about | |||
| accessibility and roaming relationships is not stored in one | accessibility and roaming relationships is not stored in one | |||
| location, but rather spread around the network. | location, but rather spread around the network. | |||
| 5. Conclusions | 5. Conclusions | |||
| The issues surrounding the network discovery and selection problem | The issues surrounding the network discovery and selection problem | |||
| have been summarized. | have been summarized. | |||
| In the opinion of the editors of this document, the main findings | In the opinion of the editors of this document, the main findings | |||
| are: | are: | |||
| o There is a clear need for access network discovery, identifier | o There is a clear need for access network discovery, identifier | |||
| selection, AAA routing, and payload routing. | selection, AAA routing, and payload routing. | |||
| o Existing mechanisms appear largely sufficient for the control of | o Existing mechanisms appear largely sufficient for the control of | |||
| payload routing, even if some minor improvements are being worked | payload routing, even if some minor improvements are being worked | |||
| on. But there appears to be justification for significantly | on. But there appears to be justification for significantly | |||
| enhanced mechanisms relating to access network discovery, | enhanced mechanisms relating to access network discovery, | |||
| identifier selection, and AAA routing. | identifier selection, and AAA routing. | |||
| o Identifier selection and AAA routing problems can and should be | ||||
| seen as the different aspects of the same problem, identifier | ||||
| selection. | ||||
| o Nevertheless, many of the problems discussed in this draft are | o Nevertheless, many of the problems discussed in this draft are | |||
| very hard when one considers them in an environment that requires | very hard when one considers them in an environment that requires | |||
| a potentially large number of networks, fast handoffs, and | a potentially large number of networks, fast handoffs, and | |||
| automatic decisions. | automatic decisions. | |||
| o The proliferation of multiple competing network discovery | o The proliferation of multiple competing network discovery | |||
| technologies within IEEE 802, IETF, and 3GPP appears to a | technologies within IEEE 802, IETF, and 3GPP appears to a | |||
| significant problem going forward. In the absence of a clearly | significant problem going forward. In the absence of a clearly | |||
| defined solution to the problem it is likely that any or all of | defined solution to the problem it is likely that any or all of | |||
| these solutions will be utilized, resulting in industry | these solutions will be utilized, resulting in industry | |||
| skipping to change at page 19, line 43 | skipping to change at page 20, line 47 | |||
| In order to avoid this fate, it is strongly suggested that a | In order to avoid this fate, it is strongly suggested that a | |||
| discussion be initiated between IETF and IEEE 802 in order to work | discussion be initiated between IETF and IEEE 802 in order to work | |||
| out the roles of the each organization in solving this problem, | out the roles of the each organization in solving this problem, | |||
| and to invite 3GPP participation so that their requirements can be | and to invite 3GPP participation so that their requirements can be | |||
| fulfilled by the planned solutions. | fulfilled by the planned solutions. | |||
| o New link layers should be designed with facilities that enable the | o New link layers should be designed with facilities that enable the | |||
| efficient distribution of network advertisement information. | efficient distribution of network advertisement information. | |||
| o Solving all problems with current link layers and existing network | o Solving all problems with current link layers and existing network | |||
| access devices may not be possible. It may be useful to consider a | access devices may not be possible. It may be useful to consider | |||
| phased approach where only certain, limited functions are provided | a phased approach where only certain, limited functions are | |||
| now, and the full functionality is provided when extensions to | provided now, and the full functionality is provided when | |||
| current link layers become available. | extensions to current link layers become available. | |||
| We will briefly comment on the specific mechanisms related to network | We will briefly comment on the specific mechanisms related to network | |||
| discovery and selection: | discovery and selection: | |||
| o As noted in studies such as [41] and [37], the IEEE 802.11 Beacon/ | o As noted in studies such as [41] and [37], the IEEE 802.11 | |||
| Probe Response mechanism has substantial scaling issues, and as a | Beacon/Probe Response mechanism has substantial scaling issues, | |||
| result a single physical access point is in practice limited to | and as a result a single physical access point is in practice | |||
| less than a dozen virtual APs on each channel with IEEE 802.11b. | limited to less than a dozen virtual APs on each channel with IEEE | |||
| 802.11b. | ||||
| The situation is improved substantially with successors such as | The situation is improved substantially with successors such as | |||
| IEEE 802.11a which enable additional channels, thus potentially | IEEE 802.11a which enable additional channels, thus potentially | |||
| increasing the number of potential virtual APs. | increasing the number of potential virtual APs. | |||
| However, even these enhancements it is not feasible to advertise | However, even these enhancements it is not feasible to advertise | |||
| more than 50 different networks using existing mechanisms, and | more than 50 different networks using existing mechanisms, and | |||
| probably significantly less in most circumstances. | probably significantly less in most circumstances. | |||
| As a result, there appears to be justification for enhancing the | As a result, there appears to be justification for enhancing the | |||
| skipping to change at page 20, line 35 | skipping to change at page 21, line 41 | |||
| large quantities of data where fragmentation would be a problem. | large quantities of data where fragmentation would be a problem. | |||
| Another typical limitation of link layer assistance in this area | Another typical limitation of link layer assistance in this area | |||
| is that in general, it would be desirable to retrive also | is that in general, it would be desirable to retrive also | |||
| information relating to the potential next access networks or | information relating to the potential next access networks or | |||
| access points. However, such networks may be of another type than | access points. However, such networks may be of another type than | |||
| the current one, so the link layer would have to carry information | the current one, so the link layer would have to carry information | |||
| relating to other types of link layers as well. This is possible, | relating to other types of link layers as well. This is possible, | |||
| but requires coordination among different groups in the industry. | but requires coordination among different groups in the industry. | |||
| o Given that EAP does not support fragmentation of EAP-Request/ | o Given that EAP does not support fragmentation of | |||
| Identity packets, and that use of EAP for network selection on all | EAP-Request/Identity packets, and that use of EAP for network | |||
| attachments will have a substantial adverse impact on roaming | selection on all attachments will have a substantial adverse | |||
| performance without appropriate lower layer support (such as | impact on roaming performance without appropriate lower layer | |||
| support for Class 1 data frames within IEEE 802.11), the use of | support (such as support for Class 1 data frames within IEEE | |||
| EAP is limited. For instance, the use of EAP to carry quality of | 802.11), the use of EAP is limited. For instance, the use of EAP | |||
| service as proposed in [16] seems hard given the limitations. | to carry quality of service as proposed in [15] seems hard given | |||
| Long-term, it makes more sense for the desired functionality to be | the limitations. Long-term, it makes more sense for the desired | |||
| handled either within IEEE 802 or at the IP layer. However, a | functionality to be handled either within IEEE 802 or at the IP | |||
| strictly limited discovery mechanism such as the one defined in | layer. However, a strictly limited discovery mechanism such as | |||
| [12] is useful. | the one defined in [12] is useful. | |||
| o In the IETF, a potential alternative is use of the SEAMOBY CARD | o In the IETF, a potential alternative is use of the SEAMOBY CARD | |||
| protocol [17], which enables advertisement of network device | protocol [16], which enables advertisement of network device | |||
| capabilities over IP. Another alternative is the recently proposed | capabilities over IP. Another alternative is the recently | |||
| Device Discovery Protocol (DDP) [22], which provides functionality | proposed Device Discovery Protocol (DDP) [22], which provides | |||
| equivalent to IEEE 802.1ab using ASN.1 encoded advertisements sent | functionality equivalent to IEEE 802.1ab using ASN.1 encoded | |||
| to a link-local scope multicast address. | advertisements sent to a link-local scope multicast address. | |||
| A limitation of these IP layer solutions is that they can only | A limitation of these IP layer solutions is that they can only | |||
| work as a means to speed up the attachment procedures when moving | work as a means to speed up the attachment procedures when moving | |||
| from one location to another; when a node starts up, it needs to | from one location to another; when a node starts up, it needs to | |||
| be able to attach to a network before IP communications are | be able to attach to a network before IP communications are | |||
| available. This is fine for optimizations, but precludes the use | available. This is fine for optimizations, but precludes the use | |||
| in a case where the discovery information is mandatory before | in a case where the discovery information is mandatory before | |||
| successful attachment can be accomplished, for instance when the | successful attachment can be accomplished, for instance when the | |||
| access network is unable to route the AAA request unaided. | access network is unable to route the AAA request unaided. | |||
| o "Phone-book" based approaches such as RFC 3017 appear attractive | o "Phone-book" based approaches such as RFC 3017 appear attractive | |||
| due to their ability to provide sufficient information for | due to their ability to provide sufficient information for | |||
| automatic selection decisions. However, there is no experience on | automatic selection decisions. However, there is no experience on | |||
| applying such approaches to wireless access. The number of WLAN | applying such approaches to wireless access. The number of WLAN | |||
| access points is significantly higher than the number of dial-in | access points is significantly higher than the number of dial-in | |||
| POPs; the distributed nature of the access network has created a | POPs; the distributed nature of the access network has created a | |||
| more complicated business and roaming structure, and the expected | more complicated business and roaming structure, and the expected | |||
| rate of change in the information is high. As noted in [40] and | rate of change in the information is high. As noted in [40] and | |||
| [16], a large fraction of current WLAN access points operate on | [15], a large fraction of current WLAN access points operate on | |||
| the default SSID, which may make the use of the phone book | the default SSID, which may make the use of the phone book | |||
| approach hard. | approach hard. | |||
| Finally, to address some of the security concerns that have come up | Finally, to address some of the security concerns that have come up | |||
| during this work, the IETF should in any case initiate work that | during this work, the IETF should in any case initiate work that | |||
| enables support for channel bindings in methods. Preferably, popular | enables support for channel bindings in methods. Preferably, popular | |||
| methods should be updated, ensuring compatibility with existing | methods should be updated, ensuring compatibility with existing | |||
| deployments. The representation of link layer parameters within EAP | deployments. The representation of link layer parameters within EAP | |||
| should utilize a common framework, to make it easier to define new | should utilize a common framework, to make it easier to define new | |||
| link layers and keep the selection of EAP methods independent of the | link layers and keep the selection of EAP methods independent of the | |||
| skipping to change at page 22, line 16 | skipping to change at page 23, line 16 | |||
| All aspects of the network discovery and selection problem are | All aspects of the network discovery and selection problem are | |||
| security related. The security issues and requirements have been | security related. The security issues and requirements have been | |||
| discussed in the previous sections. | discussed in the previous sections. | |||
| The security requirements for network discovery depend on the type of | The security requirements for network discovery depend on the type of | |||
| information being discovered. Some of the parameters may have a | information being discovered. Some of the parameters may have a | |||
| security impact, such as the claimed name of the network the user | security impact, such as the claimed name of the network the user | |||
| tries to attach to. Unfortunately, current EAP methods do not always | tries to attach to. Unfortunately, current EAP methods do not always | |||
| make the verification of such parameters possible. New EAP methods | make the verification of such parameters possible. New EAP methods | |||
| are doing it [21, 23], however, and there is even an attempt to | are doing it [21, 23], however, and there is even an attempt to | |||
| provide a backwards compatible extensions to older methods [15]. | provide a backwards compatible extensions to older methods [14]. | |||
| The security requirements for network selection depend on whether the | The security requirements for network selection depend on whether the | |||
| selection is considered as a command or a hint. For instance, the | selection is considered as a command or a hint. For instance, the | |||
| selection that the user provided may be ignored if it relates to AAA | selection that the user provided may be ignored if it relates to AAA | |||
| routing and the access network can route the AAA traffic to the | routing and the access network can route the AAA traffic to the | |||
| correct home network using other means in any case. | correct home network using other means in any case. | |||
| Normative References | 7. References | |||
| 7.1 Normative References | ||||
| [1] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and | [1] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and | |||
| specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987. | specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987. | |||
| [2] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement | [2] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement | |||
| Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. | Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. | |||
| [3] Aboba, B., Lu, J., Alsop, J., Ding, J. and W. Wang, "Review of | [3] Aboba, B., Lu, J., Alsop, J., Ding, J. and W. Wang, "Review of | |||
| Roaming Implementations", RFC 2194, September 1997. | Roaming Implementations", RFC 2194, September 1997. | |||
| skipping to change at page 23, line 35 | skipping to change at page 24, line 37 | |||
| [7] Zorn, G., Leifer, D., Rubens, A., Shriver, J., Holdrege, M. and | [7] Zorn, G., Leifer, D., Rubens, A., Shriver, J., Holdrege, M. and | |||
| I. Goyret, "RADIUS Attributes for Tunnel Protocol Support", RFC | I. Goyret, "RADIUS Attributes for Tunnel Protocol Support", RFC | |||
| 2868, June 2000. | 2868, June 2000. | |||
| [8] Riegel, M. and G. Zorn, "XML DTD for Roaming Access Phone | [8] Riegel, M. and G. Zorn, "XML DTD for Roaming Access Phone | |||
| Book", RFC 3017, December 2000. | Book", RFC 3017, December 2000. | |||
| [9] Calhoun, P., Loughney, J., Guttman, E., Zorn, G. and J. Arkko, | [9] Calhoun, P., Loughney, J., Guttman, E., Zorn, G. and J. Arkko, | |||
| "Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 3588, September 2003. | "Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 3588, September 2003. | |||
| [10] Blunk, L., "Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP)", | [10] Aboba, B., Blunk, L., Vollbrecht, J., Carlson, J. and H. | |||
| draft-ietf-eap-rfc2284bis-07 (work in progress), December 2003. | Levkowetz, "Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP)", RFC | |||
| 3748, June 2004. | ||||
| [11] Housley, R. and T. Moore, "Certificate Extensions and | [11] Housley, R. and T. Moore, "Certificate Extensions and | |||
| Attributes Supporting Authentication in PPP and Wireless LAN", | Attributes Supporting Authentication in Point-to-Point Protocol | |||
| draft-ietf-pkix-wlan-extns-04 (work in progress), December | (PPP) and Wireless Local Area Networks (WLAN)", RFC 3770, May | |||
| 2002. | 2004. | |||
| Informative References | 7.2 Informative References | |||
| [12] Adrangi, F., "Mediating Network Discovery in the Extensible | [12] Adrangi, F., Lortz, V., Bari, F., Eronen, P. and M. Watson, | |||
| Authentication Protocol (EAP)", | "Mediating Network Discovery in the Extensible Authentication | |||
| draft-adrangi-eap-network-discovery-01 (work in progress), June | Protocol (EAP)", draft-adrangi-eap-network-discovery-05 (work | |||
| 2004. | in progress), October 2004. | |||
| [13] Adrangi, F., "Network Discovery and Selection within the EAP | [13] Adrangi, F., "Network Discovery and Selection within the EAP | |||
| Framework", | Framework", | |||
| draft-adrangi-eap-network-discovery-and-selection-00 (work in | draft-adrangi-eap-network-discovery-and-selection-00 (work in | |||
| progress), October 2003. | progress), October 2003. | |||
| [14] Aboba, B., Beadles, M., Arkko, J. and P. Eronen, "The Network | [14] Arkko, J. and P. Eronen, "Authenticated Service Identities for | |||
| Access Identifier", draft-arkko-roamops-rfc2486bis-02 (work in | ||||
| progress), July 2004. | ||||
| [15] Arkko, J. and P. Eronen, "Authenticated Service Identities for | ||||
| the Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP)", | the Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP)", | |||
| draft-arkko-eap-service-identity-auth-00 (work in progress), | draft-arkko-eap-service-identity-auth-01 (work in progress), | |||
| April 2004. | October 2004. | |||
| [16] Tschofenig, H., "Network Selection Implementation Results", | [15] Tschofenig, H., "Network Selection Implementation Results", | |||
| draft-groeting-eap-netselection-results-00 (work in progress), | draft-groeting-eap-netselection-results-00 (work in progress), | |||
| July 2004. | July 2004. | |||
| [17] Liebsch, M., "Candidate Access Router Discovery", | [16] Liebsch, M., "Candidate Access Router Discovery", | |||
| draft-ietf-seamoby-card-protocol-05 (work in progress), | draft-ietf-seamoby-card-protocol-05 (work in progress), | |||
| November 2003. | November 2003. | |||
| [18] Forsberg, D., "Protocol for Carrying Authentication for Network | [17] Forsberg, D., Ohba, Y., Patil, B., Tschofenig, H. and A. Yegin, | |||
| Access (PANA)", draft-ietf-pana-pana-02 (work in progress), | "Protocol for Carrying Authentication for Network Access | |||
| October 2003. | (PANA)", draft-ietf-pana-pana-05 (work in progress), July 2004. | |||
| [19] Kaufman, C., "Internet Key Exchange (IKEv2) Protocol", | [18] Kaufman, C., "Internet Key Exchange (IKEv2) Protocol", | |||
| draft-ietf-ipsec-ikev2-07 (work in progress), April 2003. | draft-ietf-ipsec-ikev2-17 (work in progress), October 2004. | |||
| [19] Aboba, B., "The Network Access Identifier", | ||||
| draft-ietf-radext-rfc2486bis-01 (work in progress), October | ||||
| 2004. | ||||
| [20] Lior, A., "Remote Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS) | [20] Lior, A., "Remote Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS) | |||
| Redirection", draft-lior-radius-redirection-00 (work in | Redirection", draft-lior-radius-redirection-00 (work in | |||
| progress), February 2004. | progress), February 2004. | |||
| [21] Josefsson, S., Palekar, A., Simon, D. and G. Zorn, "Protected | [21] Josefsson, S., Palekar, A., Simon, D. and G. Zorn, "Protected | |||
| EAP Protocol (PEAP)", draft-josefsson-pppext-eap-tls-eap-07 | EAP Protocol (PEAP)", draft-josefsson-pppext-eap-tls-eap-07 | |||
| (work in progress), October 2003. | (work in progress), October 2003. | |||
| [22] Enns, R., Marques, P. and D. Morrell, "Device Discovery | [22] Enns, R., Marques, P. and D. Morrell, "Device Discovery | |||
| skipping to change at page 26, line 20 | skipping to change at page 27, line 12 | |||
| Selection", Sigcomm Poster Session 2002. | Selection", Sigcomm Poster Session 2002. | |||
| [39] Eronen, P., "Network Selection Issues", presentation to EAP WG | [39] Eronen, P., "Network Selection Issues", presentation to EAP WG | |||
| at IETF 58, November 2003. | at IETF 58, November 2003. | |||
| [40] Priest, J., "The State of Wireless London", July 2004. | [40] Priest, J., "The State of Wireless London", July 2004. | |||
| [41] Heusse, M., "Performance Anomaly of 802.11b", LSR-IMAG | [41] Heusse, M., "Performance Anomaly of 802.11b", LSR-IMAG | |||
| Laboratory, Grenoble, France, IEEE Infocom 2003. | Laboratory, Grenoble, France, IEEE Infocom 2003. | |||
| [42] Eronen, P. and J. Arkko, "Role of authorization in wireless | ||||
| network security", Extended abstract to be presented in the | ||||
| DIMACS workshop, November 2004. | ||||
| Authors' Addresses | Authors' Addresses | |||
| Jari Arkko | Jari Arkko | |||
| Ericsson | Ericsson | |||
| Jorvas 02420 | Jorvas 02420 | |||
| Finland | Finland | |||
| EMail: jari.arkko@ericsson.com | EMail: jari.arkko@ericsson.com | |||
| Bernard Aboba | Bernard Aboba | |||
| Microsoft | Microsoft | |||
| One Microsoft Way | One Microsoft Way | |||
| Redmond, WA 98052 | Redmond, WA 98052 | |||
| USA | USA | |||
| skipping to change at page 28, line 8 | skipping to change at page 29, line 8 | |||
| Input for version 01 has been gathered from many sources, including | Input for version 01 has been gathered from many sources, including | |||
| the above persons as well as 3GPP and IEEE developments. We would | the above persons as well as 3GPP and IEEE developments. We would | |||
| also like to thank Alper Yegin, Victor Lortz, Stephen Hayes, and | also like to thank Alper Yegin, Victor Lortz, Stephen Hayes, and | |||
| David Johnston for comments. | David Johnston for comments. | |||
| Appendix B. Modifications from Version 00 | Appendix B. Modifications from Version 00 | |||
| The following modifications have been incorporated to the -01 version | The following modifications have been incorporated to the -01 version | |||
| of this draft: | of this draft: | |||
| o Added a discussion of new IETF protocol documents relating to this | o Added a discussion of new IETF protocol documents relating to this | |||
| problem, such as [12], [14], [20], and [15]. | problem, such as [12], [19], [20], and [14]. | |||
| o Added references to a number of new documents that discuss the | o Added references to a number of new documents that discuss the | |||
| network selection problem. | network selection problem. | |||
| o Added pointers to new IEEE work in this area. | o Added pointers to new IEEE work in this area. | |||
| o Added a discussion of what type of information may need to be | o Added a discussion of what type of information may need to be | |||
| discovered and when (Section 2.6). | discovered and when (Section 2.6). | |||
| o Added a discussion relating to the use of phone books in an | o Added a discussion relating to the use of phone books in an | |||
| environment where network identifiers are not being regularly set. | environment where network identifiers are not being regularly set. | |||
| o Added a discussion of network-based control in Section 2.5. | o Added a discussion of network-based control in Section 2.5. | |||
| o Updated the conclusions. | o Updated the conclusions. | |||
| Intellectual Property Statement | Intellectual Property Statement | |||
| The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any | The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any | |||
| Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to | Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to | |||
| pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in | pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in | |||
| this document or the extent to which any license under such rights | this document or the extent to which any license under such rights | |||
| might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has | might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has | |||
| made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information | made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information | |||
| skipping to change at page 29, line 12 | skipping to change at page 30, line 12 | |||
| o Updated the conclusions. | o Updated the conclusions. | |||
| Intellectual Property Statement | Intellectual Property Statement | |||
| The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any | The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any | |||
| Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to | Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to | |||
| pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in | pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in | |||
| this document or the extent to which any license under such rights | this document or the extent to which any license under such rights | |||
| might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has | might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has | |||
| made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information | made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information | |||
| on the IETF's procedures with respect to rights in IETF Documents can | on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be | |||
| be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. | found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. | |||
| Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any | Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any | |||
| assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an | assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an | |||
| attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of | attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of | |||
| such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this | such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this | |||
| specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at | specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at | |||
| http://www.ietf.org/ipr. | http://www.ietf.org/ipr. | |||
| The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any | The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any | |||
| copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary | copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary | |||
| End of changes. | ||||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff v1.06, available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/ | ||||