1. IEEE 802.21 MEDIA INDEPENDENT HANDOVER DCN: 21-09-00xx-00-sec
Title: Media Specific vs Media Independent
Date Submitted: October 29, 2009
Present at IEEE a Teleconference, October 29, 2009
Authors: Lily Chen (NIST)
Abstract: This document raises some questions for a to discuss with regard to media specific vs media independent related concepts. The purpose is to clearly understand the implications about what has proposed and discussed so far in 21a.
xx-00-sec

2. IEEE 802.21 presentation release statements
This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE Working Group. It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein.
The contributor grants a free, irrevocable license to the IEEE to incorporate material contained in this contribution, and any modifications thereof, in the creation of an IEEE Standards publication; to copyright in the IEEE’s name any IEEE Standards publication even though it may include portions of this contribution; and at the IEEE’s sole discretion to permit others to reproduce in whole or in part the resulting IEEE Standards publication. The contributor also acknowledges and accepts that this contribution may be made public by IEEE
The contributor is familiar with IEEE patent policy, as stated in Section 6 of the IEEE-SA Standards Board bylaws < and in Understanding Patent Issues During IEEE Standards Development
xx-00-sec

3. Background
Currently, certain concepts are discussed with media specific (MS) or media independent (MI) “prefix”, such as
Media specific authentication vs. media independent authentication
Media specific authenticator vs. media independent authenticator
Media specific EAP lower layer vs. media independent EAP lower layer
Media specific AAA vs. media independent AAA …
We need to clearly understand what these concepts mean and what are the implications.

4. EAP Peer in MN MN MIHF This is going to be a hard add on! EAP Peer
Assume both MS and MI authentication are both EAP based and MI authentication is executed in MIHF (remote message transport is from MIHF to MIHF).
Do they share the same credential?
Can they execute different EAP methods?
Do these two EAP peer functions need to communicate?
Please notice that EAP protocol or each EAP-Method is media independent. That is the same EAP peer can execute EAP as an access authentication for both IEEE and IEEE MN
EAP Peer
MIHF
MI-EAP Peer
STA MS
MIH User
This is going to be a hard add on!
xx-00-sec

5. Authentication Protocol
If media independent authentication is different from media specific authentication, then which credentials it will use for each authentication?
Assume the handover is only between IEEE and
IEEE access authentication is EAP- GPSK.
IEEE authentication protocol is PKMv1.
What protocol media independent authentication should use?
This is a hard decision!
xx-00-sec

6. EAP Lower Layer
Media Independent
Media Specific
EAP
EAP IP
802.11
MIH IP
802.11
EAP peer/authenticator must understand which lower layer it is sitting on!
It is not transparent!

7. AAA Server AAA MIHF Assume EAP Server is co-located with AAA Server
If a service domain (an operator) will support MIH, then the same EAP/AAA server will be used for
access
access
Other media access
The key for different media access should be generated and distributed.
If a service domain (an operator) does not support MIH, then add this function will not help.
AAA
MI-EAP Server
MI-AAA
MIHF
EAP Server

8. Dilemma Add media independent over existing media specific is hard.
Replace existing media specific with media independent is ideal but not realistic.