From ticsa-info-admin@honor.trusecure.com Sun Aug 1 06:02:09 2004 Received: from honor.icsalabs.com (honor.trusecure.com [63.170.221.131]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA07743 for ; Sun, 1 Aug 2004 06:02:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from honor.trusecure.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E67C972E0 for ; Sun, 1 Aug 2004 05:00:37 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2004 05:00:37 -0400 Message-ID: <20040801090037.26429.75785.Mailman@honor> Subject: honor.trusecure.com mailing list memberships reminder From: probertson@trusecure.com To: hip-archive@ietf.org X-No-Archive: yes X-Ack: no Sender: ticsa-info-admin@honor.trusecure.com Errors-To: ticsa-info-admin@honor.trusecure.com X-BeenThere: ticsa-info@honor.trusecure.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk This is a reminder, sent out once a month, about your honor.trusecure.com mailing list memberships. It includes your subscription info and how to use it to change it or unsubscribe from a list. You can visit the URLs to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. In addition to the URL interfaces, you can also use email to make such changes. For more info, send a message to the '-request' address of the list (for example, hipsec-request@honor.trusecure.com) containing just the word 'help' in the message body, and an email message will be sent to you with instructions. If you have questions, problems, comments, etc, send them to probertson@trusecure.com. Thanks! Passwords for hip-archive@lists.ietf.org: List Password // URL ---- -------- hipsec@honor.trusecure.com fewefo http://honor.trusecure.com/mailman/options/hipsec/hip-archive%40lists.ietf.org From hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Wed Aug 4 17:27:57 2004 Received: from honor.icsalabs.com (honor.trusecure.com [63.170.221.131]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA09642 for ; Wed, 4 Aug 2004 17:27:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from honor.trusecure.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04D02731E; Wed, 4 Aug 2004 16:26:03 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com Received: from slb-smtpout-01.boeing.com (slb-smtpout-01.boeing.com [130.76.64.48]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C676672F9; Wed, 4 Aug 2004 16:25:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com ([192.42.227.216]) by slb-smtpout-01.boeing.com (8.9.2.MG.10092003/8.8.5-M2) with ESMTP id OAA13271; Wed, 4 Aug 2004 14:26:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from XCH-NWBH-01.nw.nos.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.11.3/8.11.3/MBS-LDAP-01) with ESMTP id i74LQk427010; Wed, 4 Aug 2004 14:26:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from XCH-NW-27.nw.nos.boeing.com ([192.48.4.101]) by XCH-NWBH-01.nw.nos.boeing.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6662); Wed, 4 Aug 2004 14:26:20 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6603.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <6938661A6EDA8A4EA8D1419BCE46F24C040607D2@xch-nw-27.nw.nos.boeing.com> Thread-Topic: HIP test server online Thread-Index: AcR6aa7AcMZdnR2LQ72rfLqZe4K+8Q== From: "Henderson, Thomas R" To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Aug 2004 21:26:20.0459 (UTC) FILETIME=[AF4F6FB0:01C47A69] Subject: [Hipsec] HIP test server online Sender: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Errors-To: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com X-BeenThere: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: HIP Protocol Discussion List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Original-Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 14:26:19 -0700 Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2004 14:26:19 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable We have made available a HIP test server online. It is at http://hipserver.mct.phantomworks.org. It runs the base exchange and IPsec as defined by the current base spec. At the meeting this week, we have successfully interoperated with both Ericsson (IPv4 and IPv6) and HIPL (IPv6) implementations, according to the new base spec. =20 We will plan on keeping the hipserver online semi-permanently now, for use as a testing target by others wishing to test their implementations. Tom _______________________________________________ Hipsec mailing list Hipsec@honor.trusecure.com http://honor.trusecure.com/mailman/listinfo/hipsec From hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Wed Aug 4 23:56:59 2004 Received: from honor.icsalabs.com (honor.trusecure.com [63.170.221.131]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA04942 for ; Wed, 4 Aug 2004 23:56:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from honor.trusecure.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 704A4730C; Wed, 4 Aug 2004 22:55:03 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com Received: from pegasus.hiit.fi (pegasus.hiit.fi [212.68.1.186]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5EF172F9; Wed, 4 Aug 2004 22:54:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from n97.nomadiclab.com (unknown [128.214.112.65]) by pegasus.hiit.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD8AF220006; Thu, 5 Aug 2004 06:55:57 +0300 (EEST) Received: from [IPv6:::1] (polle-vpn.local.pnr.iki.fi [192.168.0.193]) by n97.nomadiclab.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABD128; Thu, 5 Aug 2004 06:55:57 +0300 (EEST) In-Reply-To: <6938661A6EDA8A4EA8D1419BCE46F24C040607D2@xch-nw-27.nw.nos.boeing.com> References: <6938661A6EDA8A4EA8D1419BCE46F24C040607D2@xch-nw-27.nw.nos.boeing.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v618) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <5A2476DE-E693-11D8-8C46-000393CE1E8C@nomadiclab.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: , From: Pekka Nikander To: "Henderson, Thomas R" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.618) Subject: [Hipsec] Re: [Hipsec-rg] HIP test server online Sender: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Errors-To: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com X-BeenThere: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: HIP Protocol Discussion List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Original-Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 06:55:55 +0300 Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 06:55:55 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > We have made available a HIP test server online. It is at > http://hipserver.mct.phantomworks.org. It runs the base > exchange and IPsec as defined by the current base spec. This is great news! Thanks, Tom, for the hard work!! We are planning to get a new release of our FreeBSD code out. That should happen in a couple of weeks, probably once we've made sure that it works on FreeBSD 5.3 (beta or final). --Pekka Nikander _______________________________________________ Hipsec mailing list Hipsec@honor.trusecure.com http://honor.trusecure.com/mailman/listinfo/hipsec From hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Thu Aug 5 11:22:59 2004 Received: from honor.icsalabs.com (honor.trusecure.com [63.170.221.131]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA23921 for ; Thu, 5 Aug 2004 11:22:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from honor.trusecure.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AC627302; Thu, 5 Aug 2004 10:21:01 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com Received: from albatross.ericsson.se (albatross.ericsson.se [193.180.251.49]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41F2F72F9 for ; Thu, 5 Aug 2004 10:20:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from esealmw141.al.sw.ericsson.se ([153.88.254.120]) by albatross.ericsson.se (8.12.10/8.12.10/WIREfire-1.8b) with ESMTP id i75FM1WR028661 for ; Thu, 5 Aug 2004 17:22:02 +0200 (MEST) Received: from esealnt611.al.sw.ericsson.se ([153.88.254.121]) by esealmw141.al.sw.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.0); Thu, 5 Aug 2004 17:22:01 +0200 Received: from mail.lmf.ericsson.se (dossier.lmf.ericsson.se [131.160.11.13]) by esealnt611.al.sw.ericsson.se with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2657.72) id PR2HABHW; Thu, 5 Aug 2004 17:22:01 +0200 Received: from ericsson.com (rvi2-93-38.sw.ericsson.se [153.88.93.38]) by mail.lmf.ericsson.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A0DD18AA2 for ; Thu, 5 Aug 2004 18:22:00 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <41125097.7020600@ericsson.com> X-Sybari-Trust: 2ca33488 74470f8f 41c31840 00000138 From: Gonzalo Camarillo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: HIP Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Aug 2004 15:22:01.0677 (UTC) FILETIME=[F4DFBFD0:01C47AFF] Subject: [Hipsec] Slides Sender: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Errors-To: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com X-BeenThere: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: HIP Protocol Discussion List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Original-Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 18:21:59 +0300 Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 18:21:59 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Folks, today's presentations slides will be available at: http://hip.piuha.net/meetings/ietf60/slides/ Regards, Gonzalo _______________________________________________ Hipsec mailing list Hipsec@honor.trusecure.com http://honor.trusecure.com/mailman/listinfo/hipsec From hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Fri Aug 6 00:14:04 2004 Received: from honor.icsalabs.com (honor.trusecure.com [63.170.221.131]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA11521 for ; Fri, 6 Aug 2004 00:14:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from honor.trusecure.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8685572EA; Thu, 5 Aug 2004 23:12:01 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com Received: from smtp2.rz.tu-harburg.de (smtp2.rz.tu-harburg.de [134.28.205.13]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BE1D72F9 for ; Thu, 5 Aug 2004 07:25:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail2.rz.tu-harburg.de (mail2.rz.tu-harburg.de [134.28.202.179]) by smtp2.rz.tu-harburg.de (8.12.7/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i75CQir5031019 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 5 Aug 2004 14:26:44 +0200 Received: from cgi00.rz.tu-harburg.de (cgi00.rz.tu-harburg.de [134.28.202.34]) by mail2.rz.tu-harburg.de (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i75CQiqI019883 for ; Thu, 5 Aug 2004 14:26:44 +0200 Received: (from webmail@localhost) by cgi00.rz.tu-harburg.de (8.11.6/8.11.6/SuSE Linux 0.5) id i75CQiN21679 for hipsec@honor.trusecure.com; Thu, 5 Aug 2004 14:26:44 +0200 X-Authentication-Warning: cgi00.rz.tu-harburg.de: webmail set sender to aarthi.nagarajan@tu-harburg.de using -f Received: from proxy11.netz.sbs.de (proxy11.netz.sbs.de [192.35.17.11]) by webmail.tu-harburg.de (IMP) with HTTP for ; Thu, 5 Aug 2004 14:26:44 +0200 Message-ID: <1091708804.41122784466b4@webmail.tu-harburg.de> From: Aarthi Nagarajan To: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) 3.2.3-cvs X-Scanned-By: TUHH Rechenzentrum content checker Subject: [Hipsec] cant access the HIP server Sender: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Errors-To: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com X-BeenThere: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: HIP Protocol Discussion List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Original-Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 14:26:44 +0200 Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 14:26:44 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit hi, I am trying to access the HIP server at http://hipserver.mct.phantomworks.org. Is the server down or alright? How should I know? Thanks, Aarthi _______________________________________________ Hipsec mailing list Hipsec@honor.trusecure.com http://honor.trusecure.com/mailman/listinfo/hipsec From hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Fri Aug 6 11:33:06 2004 Received: from honor.icsalabs.com (honor.trusecure.com [63.170.221.131]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA04781 for ; Fri, 6 Aug 2004 11:33:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from honor.trusecure.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92EBF7324; Fri, 6 Aug 2004 10:31:01 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com Received: from slb-smtpout-01.boeing.com (slb-smtpout-01.boeing.com [130.76.64.48]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 790297305 for ; Fri, 6 Aug 2004 10:30:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from slb-av-01.boeing.com ([129.172.13.4]) by slb-smtpout-01.boeing.com (8.9.2.MG.10092003/8.8.5-M2) with ESMTP id IAA05303; Fri, 6 Aug 2004 08:32:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xch-nw-23p.nw.nos.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by slb-av-01.boeing.com (8.11.3/8.11.3/MBS-LDAP-01) with ESMTP id i76FW3E04131; Fri, 6 Aug 2004 08:32:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from XCH-NW-09.nw.nos.boeing.com ([192.42.226.84]) by xch-nw-23p.nw.nos.boeing.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Fri, 6 Aug 2004 08:32:01 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6556.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Hipsec] cant access the HIP server Message-ID: <2B3DC5CC87DC754E8EF8B9271F91AA270427A824@xch-nw-09.nw.nos.boeing.com> Thread-Topic: [Hipsec] cant access the HIP server Thread-Index: AcR7cmTL+ZWWFaq7Sfi1rvEVCprp/QAWAhUA From: "Ahrenholz, Jeffrey M" To: "Aarthi Nagarajan" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Aug 2004 15:32:01.0761 (UTC) FILETIME=[84F70D10:01C47BCA] Sender: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Errors-To: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com X-BeenThere: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: HIP Protocol Discussion List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Original-Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 08:32:01 -0700 Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 08:32:01 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Yes, the server has been recently down. We will try to keep it online all of the time, please try again. The server's IP addresses are currently 130.76.43.74 and 2001:5c0:8fff:fffe::0055, which you could try pinging. There is also a link off of the main page for checking the status of the HIP process (hipd): http://hipserver.mct.phantomworks.org/cgi-bin/info.cgi -Jeff > -----Original Message----- > From: Aarthi Nagarajan [mailto:aarthi.nagarajan@tu-harburg.de]=20 > Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 5:27 AM > To: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com > Subject: [Hipsec] cant access the HIP server >=20 >=20 > hi, >=20 > I am trying to access the HIP server at=20 > http://hipserver.mct.phantomworks.org.=20 > Is the server down or alright? How should I know? >=20 > Thanks, > Aarthi >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Hipsec mailing list > Hipsec@honor.trusecure.com > http://honor.trusecure.com/mailman/listinfo/hipsec >=20 _______________________________________________ Hipsec mailing list Hipsec@honor.trusecure.com http://honor.trusecure.com/mailman/listinfo/hipsec From hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Fri Aug 6 11:51:06 2004 Received: from honor.icsalabs.com (honor.trusecure.com [63.170.221.131]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA05682 for ; Fri, 6 Aug 2004 11:51:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from honor.trusecure.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F16057312; Fri, 6 Aug 2004 10:49:01 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com Received: from slb-smtpout-01.boeing.com (slb-smtpout-01.boeing.com [130.76.64.48]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AB4E7310 for ; Fri, 6 Aug 2004 10:48:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com ([192.42.227.216]) by slb-smtpout-01.boeing.com (8.9.2.MG.10092003/8.8.5-M2) with ESMTP id IAA24726; Fri, 6 Aug 2004 08:49:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from XCH-NWBH-01.nw.nos.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.11.3/8.11.3/MBS-LDAP-01) with ESMTP id i76Fnh407982; Fri, 6 Aug 2004 08:49:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from XCH-NW-27.nw.nos.boeing.com ([192.48.4.101]) by XCH-NWBH-01.nw.nos.boeing.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6662); Fri, 6 Aug 2004 08:49:40 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6603.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Hipsec] cant access the HIP server Message-ID: <6938661A6EDA8A4EA8D1419BCE46F24C04522380@xch-nw-27.nw.nos.boeing.com> Thread-Topic: [Hipsec] cant access the HIP server Thread-Index: AcR7cmbz//MF36wKT5upj14GeajZ/gAWl9DA From: "Henderson, Thomas R" To: "Aarthi Nagarajan" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Aug 2004 15:49:40.0747 (UTC) FILETIME=[FC2B7DB0:01C47BCC] Sender: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Errors-To: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com X-BeenThere: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: HIP Protocol Discussion List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Original-Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 08:49:40 -0700 Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 08:49:40 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable according to the log, it has been up all day, but we are not going to guarantee 100% uptime. Please let us know directly if you think there is a specific problem. Tom > -----Original Message----- > From: Aarthi Nagarajan [mailto:aarthi.nagarajan@tu-harburg.de]=20 > Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 5:27 AM > To: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com > Subject: [Hipsec] cant access the HIP server >=20 >=20 > hi, >=20 > I am trying to access the HIP server at=20 > http://hipserver.mct.phantomworks.org.=20 > Is the server down or alright? How should I know? >=20 > Thanks, > Aarthi >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Hipsec mailing list > Hipsec@honor.trusecure.com > http://honor.trusecure.com/mailman/listinfo/hipsec >=20 _______________________________________________ Hipsec mailing list Hipsec@honor.trusecure.com http://honor.trusecure.com/mailman/listinfo/hipsec From hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Mon Aug 9 20:44:28 2004 Received: from honor.icsalabs.com (honor.trusecure.com [63.170.221.131]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA09541 for ; Mon, 9 Aug 2004 20:44:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from honor.trusecure.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 520F67303; Mon, 9 Aug 2004 19:41:58 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com Received: from mail.cs.helsinki.fi (courier.cs.helsinki.fi [128.214.9.1]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B1EA72E2 for ; Mon, 9 Aug 2004 06:22:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [128.214.113.208] (guest208.hiit.fi [::ffff:128.214.113.208]) (AUTH: PLAIN gurtov, ) by mail.cs.helsinki.fi with esmtp; Mon, 09 Aug 2004 14:24:30 +0300 Message-ID: <41175ECD.4040404@cs.helsinki.fi> From: Andrei Gurtov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040803 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Hipsec] questions on hip-mm Sender: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Errors-To: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com X-BeenThere: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: HIP Protocol Discussion List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Original-Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 14:23:57 +0300 Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 14:23:57 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, Skimming through the hip-mm-02 draft I was pondering if any mechanism is needed to ensure robustness of a reachability check (retransmissions with exponential back off as with a TCP keepalive timer?) in case if probes get lost due to errors or congestion somewhere. Another question is how does HIP select an IP address of a multihomed host to use, is there some API that the application can negotiate with HIP on this? And in case the transport protocol wants to transmit simultaneously over multiple paths, can it be accomplished with the current draft? Andrei _______________________________________________ Hipsec mailing list Hipsec@honor.trusecure.com http://honor.trusecure.com/mailman/listinfo/hipsec From hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Thu Aug 12 14:46:44 2004 Received: from honor.icsalabs.com (honor.trusecure.com [63.170.221.131]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA22061 for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 14:46:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from honor.trusecure.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6276672F5; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:43:36 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com Received: from p2.piuha.net (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 798AB72E8 for ; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 01:04:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from piuha.net (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by p2.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 778AB89810; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 09:06:47 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <411865E7.8040209@piuha.net> From: Jari Arkko Reply-To: jari.arkko@piuha.net Organization: None User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrei Gurtov Cc: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com Subject: Re: [Hipsec] questions on hip-mm References: <41175ECD.4040404@cs.helsinki.fi> In-Reply-To: <41175ECD.4040404@cs.helsinki.fi> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Errors-To: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com X-BeenThere: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: HIP Protocol Discussion List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Original-Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 09:06:31 +0300 Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 09:06:31 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Andrei Gurtov wrote: > Hi, > > Skimming through the hip-mm-02 draft I was pondering if any mechanism is > needed to ensure robustness of a reachability check (retransmissions > with exponential back off as with a TCP keepalive timer?) in case if > probes get lost due to errors or congestion somewhere. Another question I think this is needed, and seems to be missing from the draft as it is. I wonder if it also means that the UNVERIFIED/ACTIVE/DEPRECATED states need to be changed. But we could also handle the retransmission only in the text. > is how does HIP select an IP address of a multihomed host to use, is > there some API that the application can negotiate with HIP on this? And > in case the transport protocol wants to transmit simultaneously over > multiple paths, can it be accomplished with the current draft? I do not think transmission over multiple paths simultaneously is advisable with current protocols. That would create TCP effects that we don't know how to deal with yet. So my belief is that HIP, just like SCTP and MOBIKE, should at the moment deal with failover rather than load balancing. This still leaves your original question of how to choose the address. Here's my take on it: o The peer can provide some guidance on the address to use. o There are some local means to figure out if another address should be used, a link down notification from one interface, for instance. These means should be used where possible. There are also non-local means, basically dealing with the observation that "it doesn't work". More on this below: o We actually have a path (address pair) selection problem rather than just having to choose the peer's address. o In the absence of peer's guidance and/or upon a change in the situation, the two participants should employ some form of path testing or keepalives to figure out if the current path or some of its alternatives are actually working. Upon finding that the current path does not work and that an alternative path does work, the peers should switch to the new path. --Jari _______________________________________________ Hipsec mailing list Hipsec@honor.trusecure.com http://honor.trusecure.com/mailman/listinfo/hipsec From hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Thu Aug 12 14:47:02 2004 Received: from honor.icsalabs.com (honor.trusecure.com [63.170.221.131]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA22083 for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 14:47:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from honor.trusecure.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC6897311; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:43:39 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com Received: from p2.piuha.net (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D51372E8 for ; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 02:52:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from piuha.net (p2.piuha.net [131.160.192.2]) by p2.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 698E089810; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 10:54:27 +0300 (EEST) Message-ID: <41187F24.5020407@piuha.net> From: Jari Arkko Reply-To: jari.arkko@piuha.net Organization: None User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7b) Gecko/20040316 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrei Gurtov Cc: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com Subject: Re: [Hipsec] questions on hip-mm References: <41175ECD.4040404@cs.helsinki.fi> In-Reply-To: <41175ECD.4040404@cs.helsinki.fi> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Errors-To: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com X-BeenThere: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: HIP Protocol Discussion List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Original-Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 10:54:12 +0300 Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 10:54:12 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Andrei Gurtov wrote: > Hi, > > Skimming through the hip-mm-02 draft I was pondering if any mechanism is > needed to ensure robustness of a reachability check (retransmissions > with exponential back off as with a TCP keepalive timer?) in case if > probes get lost due to errors or congestion somewhere. Another question I think this is needed, and seems to be missing from the draft as it is. I wonder if it also means that the UNVERIFIED/ACTIVE/DEPRECATED states need to be changed. But we could also handle the retransmission only in the text. > is how does HIP select an IP address of a multihomed host to use, is > there some API that the application can negotiate with HIP on this? And > in case the transport protocol wants to transmit simultaneously over > multiple paths, can it be accomplished with the current draft? I do not think transmission over multiple paths simultaneously is advisable with current protocols. That would create TCP effects that we don't know how to deal with yet. So my belief is that HIP, just like SCTP and MOBIKE, should at the moment deal with failover rather than load balancing. This still leaves your original question of how to choose the address. Here's my take on it: o The peer can provide some guidance on the address to use. o There are some local means to figure out if another address should be used, a link down notification from one interface, for instance. These means should be used where possible. There are also non-local means, basically dealing with the observation that "it doesn't work". More on this below: o We actually have a path (address pair) selection problem rather than just having to choose the peer's address. o In the absence of peer's guidance and/or upon a change in the situation, the two participants should employ some form of path testing or keepalives to figure out if the current path or some of its alternatives are actually working. Upon finding that the current path does not work and that an alternative path does work, the peers should switch to the new path. --Jari _______________________________________________ Hipsec mailing list Hipsec@honor.trusecure.com http://honor.trusecure.com/mailman/listinfo/hipsec From hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Thu Aug 12 14:48:07 2004 Received: from honor.icsalabs.com (honor.trusecure.com [63.170.221.131]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA22141 for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 14:48:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from honor.trusecure.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAAF67304; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:45:01 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com Received: from stl-smtpout-01.boeing.com (stl-smtpout-01.boeing.com [130.76.96.56]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A0A272E2 for ; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 20:35:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com ([192.42.227.216]) by stl-smtpout-01.boeing.com (8.9.2.MG.10092003/8.8.5-M2) with ESMTP id UAA25091; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 20:37:15 -0500 (CDT) Received: from xch-nw-23p.nw.nos.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.11.3/8.11.3/MBS-LDAP-01) with ESMTP id i7B1bE418138; Tue, 10 Aug 2004 18:37:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from XCH-NW-27.nw.nos.boeing.com ([192.48.4.101]) by xch-nw-23p.nw.nos.boeing.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Tue, 10 Aug 2004 18:37:14 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6603.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Hipsec] questions on hip-mm Message-ID: <6938661A6EDA8A4EA8D1419BCE46F24C040607E3@xch-nw-27.nw.nos.boeing.com> Thread-Topic: [Hipsec] questions on hip-mm Thread-Index: AcR+cyFHC1tPjQlMSp+03cE85LU6vwAztJVQ From: "Henderson, Thomas R" To: "Andrei Gurtov" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Aug 2004 01:37:14.0101 (UTC) FILETIME=[BA756A50:01C47F43] Sender: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Errors-To: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com X-BeenThere: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: HIP Protocol Discussion List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Original-Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 18:37:13 -0700 Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 18:37:13 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > -----Original Message----- > From: Andrei Gurtov [mailto:gurtov@cs.helsinki.fi] > Sent: Monday, August 09, 2004 4:24 AM > To: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com > Subject: [Hipsec] questions on hip-mm >=20 >=20 > Hi, >=20 > Skimming through the hip-mm-02 draft I was pondering if any=20 > mechanism is=20 > needed to ensure robustness of a reachability check (retransmissions=20 > with exponential back off as with a TCP keepalive timer?) in case if=20 > probes get lost due to errors or congestion somewhere.=20 Yes, this is protected by the general UPDATE mechanism. Retransmissions of UPDATEs are discussed in Section 7.5 and 8.10 of the base spec. How to determine the timeout value (exponential backoff or constant) is not specified. It might be clearer to state in the mm draft something about retransmission of UPDATE packets. > Another question=20 > is how does HIP select an IP address of a multihomed host to use, is=20 > there some API that the application can negotiate with HIP on=20 > this?=20 I don't think that this is addressed. I assume that you mean: how does an initial HIP exchange pick a source or destination address=20 when there are several to choose from? Presumably, the same way=20 that it is done when there is no HIP. > And=20 > in case the transport protocol wants to transmit simultaneously over=20 > multiple paths, can it be accomplished with the current draft? I would say that it is not precluded by the current draft, but not explicitly addressed. In general, there are open issues with respect to doing this (congestion control, MTU, need to either have loose replay windows or separate SAs). Tom=20 _______________________________________________ Hipsec mailing list Hipsec@honor.trusecure.com http://honor.trusecure.com/mailman/listinfo/hipsec From hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Thu Aug 12 14:48:22 2004 Received: from honor.icsalabs.com (honor.trusecure.com [63.170.221.131]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA22167 for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 14:48:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from honor.trusecure.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2DC37308; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:45:35 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com Received: from pegasus.hiit.fi (pegasus.hiit.fi [212.68.1.186]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A3E472E2 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 07:36:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from n97.nomadiclab.com (unknown [128.214.112.65]) by pegasus.hiit.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id A874A22000B for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 15:38:17 +0300 (EEST) Received: from [IPv6:::1] (teldanex-vpn.local.pnr.iki.fi [192.168.0.194]) by n97.nomadiclab.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4ADF8 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2004 15:38:17 +0300 (EEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <51F71FB8-EB93-11D8-9BDE-000393CE1E8C@nomadiclab.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed To: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com From: Pekka Nikander X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.619) Subject: [Hipsec] Test please ignore Sender: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Errors-To: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com X-BeenThere: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: HIP Protocol Discussion List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Original-Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 15:38:17 +0300 Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 15:38:17 +0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This is a test. We've recently had posting problems. This is a test. Please ignore. --Pekka _______________________________________________ Hipsec mailing list Hipsec@honor.trusecure.com http://honor.trusecure.com/mailman/listinfo/hipsec From hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Fri Aug 13 22:08:58 2004 Received: from honor.icsalabs.com (honor.trusecure.com [63.170.221.131]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA02481 for ; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 22:08:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from honor.trusecure.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3062731B; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 21:06:01 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com Received: from blv-smtpout-01.boeing.com (blv-smtpout-01.boeing.com [130.76.32.69]) by honor.icsalabs.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D8FC731A for ; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 21:05:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com ([192.42.227.216]) by blv-smtpout-01.boeing.com (8.9.2.MG.10092003/8.8.5-M2) with ESMTP id TAA23766 for ; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:07:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from XCH-NWBH-01.nw.nos.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.11.3/8.11.3/MBS-LDAP-01) with ESMTP id i7E27v420850 for ; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:07:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from XCH-NW-27.nw.nos.boeing.com ([192.48.4.101]) by XCH-NWBH-01.nw.nos.boeing.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6662); Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:07:57 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6603.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <6938661A6EDA8A4EA8D1419BCE46F24C040607F2@xch-nw-27.nw.nos.boeing.com> Thread-Topic: multi6 summary Thread-Index: AcSBo4Rb79K0/EBmQ5qYm6aw1OD3TA== From: "Henderson, Thomas R" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Aug 2004 02:07:57.0409 (UTC) FILETIME=[84652510:01C481A3] Subject: [Hipsec] multi6 summary Sender: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com Errors-To: hipsec-admin@honor.trusecure.com X-BeenThere: hipsec@honor.trusecure.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: HIP Protocol Discussion List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Original-Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:07:57 -0700 Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 19:07:57 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable At the IETF60 meeting of HIP WG, the chairs asked=20 me to summarize my multi6 presentation for the list, so as to obtain consensus as to what, if anything, to do. Summary: The multi6 working group has named a design team to study a consolidated approach for the class of solutions that it calls a "layer 3.5 wedge". A draft: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-nikander-multi6-hip-01.txt about HIP is one of the drafts being considered. More information about the multi6 effort can be found at: http://ops.ietf.org/lists/multi6/multi6.2004/msg01205.html Previously, the consensus of those working on HIP has been that HIP should evolve without strict dependencies on other working groups, and vice versa. However, in the context of the multi6 discussions, there were a number of possible objections raised to HIP as a multi6 solution. In light of this, since multihoming is an important possible use of HIP, I thought that it would be prudent to at least consider whether the objections being raised might be addressed now by the working group, if by addressing them now it would make HIP more useful in the long run. The objections were: i) reliance on an experimental protocol ii) absence of supporting infrastructure (e.g., to look up identities and HITs) iii) HIP handshake (PK signatures) considered too heavyweight for some applications iv) mandatory IPsec considered too heavyweight for some applications v) use of HITs as application-level identifiers may break referrals vi) privacy concerns with the use of non-ephemeral identifiers Now, regarding whether any of the current specifications should be changed to possibly remedy these objections, i) and ii) are not related to the base spec, and we can't do anything about them now. It has been proposed by some people on the multi6 list that iii) could be addressed by using a lightweight handshake by default and "upgrading" the session to HIP protection if it was deemed necessary (e.g., mobility). But the security properties of the HIP handshake are considered an essential part of the security. iv) is addressed by a possible "Lightweight HIP" idea in the HIP multi6 draft-- such a protocol could be specified as an extension to HIP and doesn't really require base spec changes at this time. vi) is a=20 valid concern, but HIP does have mechanism (anonymous identity support) to allow for privacy-- it is the management of HIP identities that is the real concern here, but that is an issue possibly outside of the base spec. This leaves problem v)-- the referrals problem for legacy applications and stacks. The two main alternatives are to use IP addresses (locators) as upper-layer identifiers, or to use HITs as transport layer identifiers, and translate them to IP addresses for legacy applications and APIs. Architecturally, the latter alternative is cleaner, but the former one may have advantage if the HIP exchange is delayed past the initial exchange. See, for example,=20 the thread at: http://honor.trusecure.com/pipermail/hipsec/2004-July/000879.html The reason that this is relevant is because it affects what is chosen to put into the pseudoheader. It is not critical to solve this problem once and for all at this time. It may be possible to define a mode of HIP operation in the=20 future that allows IP addresses in the transport level pseudoheader, if there is a big need for deferring all HIP context exchange until after initial packets flow on a session, but that probably can be dealt with in a protocol extension. For now, if we prefer to continue using HITs as the transport-level identifier, we seem to be implicitly saying that we must have some handshake to exchange the HITs before any packets flow between hosts, even if it is not a full HIP handshake to start the session. So in summary, it is my opinion (also expressed at the WG meeting)=20 that nothing needs to be done to the base spec now to accommodate=20 the multi6 problem. One possible enhancement would be to suggest that implementations use IP addresses as application layer identifiers=20 for legacy applications and sockets API. There is some discussion of this problem in Appendix A of the base spec. Maybe new base spec text is needed for that topic. multi6 will eventually come to a solution or solutions that may (or may not) include HIP concepts, but after some experience is gained with what the real requirements are, changes to HIP could probably be handled in an extension to HIP rather than changing the base spec at this time. Tom=20 _______________________________________________ Hipsec mailing list Hipsec@honor.trusecure.com http://honor.trusecure.com/mailman/listinfo/hipsec