iSCSI: SRP vs DH-CHAP

["Mallikarjun C." <cbm@rose.hp.com>]

All:

As we all know, there is an effort underway to DH-enhance the
CHAP protocol, or perhaps invent a new authentication mechanism
as "MUST implement" in lieu of SRP.  I have a couple of comments
in this regard.

- Given that Lucent's new clarification came after Minneapolis, let's 
   consider the possibility that several/most WG participants are now
   favorably inclined to go with SRP as the "MUST implement".  Can 
   folks with continuing concerns on SRP please speak up? [ This is *not*
   a legal advice; but HP's lawyers do not see any issues for Hewlett-Packard 
   in the area of SRP. ]

- I find the statement that IESG would send back the iSCSI draft if
   it thinks that a sufficient analysis hadn't been done on DH-CHAP
   to be surprising to say the least.  If SRP meets the needs (more on this
   in the next bullet) and SRP has an IPR situation that's deemed 
   acceptable from IETF's perspective (let's recall that SRP is a 
   standards track RFC), why would IESG return the iSCSI spec back? 
   [ To provide the context for this question, consider that EMC is in 
     a similar situation with iSCSI - http://www.ietf.org/ietf/IPR/EMC-IPS 
   - using generally the same language as we had seen with Lucent. ]

- A procedural question in this regard is the seeming lack of 
   documented requirements for the authentication mechanism.  I 
   don't really see a list of requirements stated in the security draft,
   even though there's general text that discusses some issues.  (BTW,
   the iSCSI requirements draft (rightly) does not go to the depth we're
   seeking here). I am equally to blame for this, but I was under the 
   impression that we had a list of *documented* requirements to 
   evaluate candidates - and we chose SRP.  I was somewhat surprised 
   to see that we now seem to be defining/weakening requirements afresh 
   in some of the recent email threads I had seen.  I admit that I am not 
   a security expert, but I am personally not _yet_ clear on the requirements.... 
-- 
Mallikarjun 


Mallikarjun Chadalapaka
Networked Storage Architecture
Network Storage Solutions Organization
MS 5668 Hewlett-Packard, Roseville.
cbm@rose.hp.com