Re: [802.21] Mutual authentication requirements in SSG
Hi all,
MN to IS authentication may be optional, but IS to MN authentication
should be mandatory in order to provide guarantee that the MN receives
information from a correct source.
Best regards,
Maryna Komarova
Yoshihiro Ohba a écrit :
>Hi Perets,
>
>This topic is important for SSG TR.
>
>On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 01:54:07AM -0600, Feder, Peretz (Peretz) wrote:
>
>
>>Michael: We actually were planning to use IS in 802.16 before the 802.16
>>full authentication, if now required we may loose the pre-authentication
>>network entry flexibility.
>>
>>
>
>This leads to an issue on whether the security feature to be defined
>by a new project (if approved) should be mandatory to use or option to
>use. We may need to define it as option to use at least for IS,
>considering the 802.16 usage mentioned above as well as GAS usage in
>802.11u. We may need to investigate the same issue for ES and CS as
>well.
>
>Regards,
>Yoshihiro Ohba
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>________________________________
>>
>>From: Michael G Williams [mailto:Michael.G.Williams@NOKIA.COM]
>>Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 8:15 PM
>>To: STDS-802-21@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
>>Subject: [802.21] Mutual authentication requirements in SSG
>>
>>
>>
>>Hi,
>>
>>In the security study group, we discussed the need for MIHF level
>>authentication.
>>
>>There were a few topics in this area:
>>
>>What do people see as serving as the basis for credentials for the MIHF?
>>
>>
>>Is it possible to reuse the network access authentication or MSTP
>>transport authentication for the MIHF level?
>>
>>Is mutual authentication always required, or is one way sufficient for
>>some applications?
>>
>>Is the need for authentication different between the four different
>>services (management, ES, IS, CE)?
>>
>>Comments? Proposed solutions?
>>
>>Best Regards,
>>Michael
>>
>>
>>