|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: iSCSI: Login ProposalGood questions, Steve. Question 2 caused me to ponder the concept of key-value preferences. I.e., I suspect that the concept in the proposed login spec was to address that the initiator may prefer to not have any security digests, but might be able to negotiate them if the target insisted. I cannot find anywhere in the I-D that states that a recipient MUST consider key=v1,v2,v3 as the sender having preference of v1 over v2, and v2 over v3. Thus, I second Q2, but only if key values are to be interpreted in preferential order. Thus, an initiator could send "DataDigest=none,crc32-c,SPKM", and the target's response MUST honor the preference order. So, Q4 is: should the values in a key-value list be consider the sender's preference order that the receiver must honor? Stephen -----Original Message----- From: Steve Senum [mailto:ssenum@cisco.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2001 1:14 PM To: ietf-ips Subject: Re: iSCSI: Login Proposal Matthew/Marjorie/Bob: Some questions on your login proposal: 1. Why the following restriction? SecurityContextComplete=yes MUST NOT be present in the login command. I don't see the benefit in not allowing something like: I: AuthMethod:none HeaderDigest:crc-32c,none DataDigest:crc-32c,none SecurityContextComplete=yes T: AuthMethod:none HeaderDigest:crc-32c DataDigest:crc-32c SecurityContextComlete=yes 2. In the following: If the login command does not contain security parameters the target MUST perform one of the two actions below: a) If the target requires security negotiation to be performed, then it MUST enter the security phase and MUST send a text response containing one or more security parameters and F=0. b) Is this really needed? Why not simply require the initiator to offer security parameters if it supports them? I would hope authentication would become the typical case for login. 3. Is there only one Login Reponse then (just asking)? Regards, Steve Senum
Home Last updated: Tue Feb 26 08:18:02 2002 8892 messages in chronological order |