1. Robert Moskowitz, Verizon
November 2011
Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)
Submission Title: KMPIG Agenda Atlanta 2011
Date Submitted: November 9, 2011
Source: Robert Moskowitz, Verizon
Address 1000 Bent Creek Blvd, MechanicsBurg, PA, USA
Voice:+1 (248) ,
Re: KMP IG Opening Report for September 2011 Session
Abstract: Opening report for the KMP IG Session.
Purpose: To focus activities during the meeting
Notice: This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE P 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.
Release: The contributor acknowledges and accepts that this contribution becomes the property of IEEE and may be made publicly available by P
Robert Moskowitz, Verizon

2. KMPIG Agenda / Opening Report
November 2011
KMPIG Agenda / Opening Report
Atlanta
November 9, 2011
Robert Moskowitz, Verizon

3. Abstract To provide for a Key Management Protocol for 802.15
November 2011
Abstract
To provide for a Key Management Protocol for
Be KMP agnostic
Provide guidelines for specific KMPs like HIP, 802.1X, and IKEv2
To present use scenarios and how a KMP facilitates security in those scenarios.
Robert Moskowitz, Verizon

4. November 2011
Meeting Protocol
Please announce your affiliation when you first address the group during a meeting slot
Robert Moskowitz, Verizon

5. Attendance Register Indicate attendance November 2011
Register
Indicate attendance
Robert Moskowitz, Verizon

6. Participants, Patents, and Duty to Inform
November 2011
All participants in this meeting have certain obligations under the IEEE-SA Patent Policy. Participants:
“Shall inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed)” of the identity of each “holder of any potential Essential Patent Claims of which they are personally aware” if the claims are owned or controlled by the participant or the entity the participant is from, employed by, or otherwise represents
“Personal awareness” means that the participant “is personally aware that the holder may have a potential Essential Patent Claim,” even if the participant is not personally aware of the specific patents or patent claims
“Should inform the IEEE (or cause the IEEE to be informed)” of the identity of “any other holders of such potential Essential Patent Claims” (that is, third parties that are not affiliated with the participant, with the participant’s employer, or with anyone else that the participant is from or otherwise represents)
The above does not apply if the patent claim is already the subject of an Accepted Letter of Assurance that applies to the proposed standard(s) under consideration by this group
Quoted text excerpted from IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws subclause 6.2
Early identification of holders of potential Essential Patent Claims is strongly encouraged
No duty to perform a patent search
Robert Moskowitz, Verizon

7. Patent Related Links November 2011 Robert Moskowitz, Verizon
All participants should be familiar with their obligations under the IEEE-SA Policies & Procedures for standards development.
Patent Policy is stated in these sources:
IEEE-SA Standards Boards Bylaws
IEEE-SA Standards Board Operations Manual
Material about the patent policy is available at
If you have questions, contact the IEEE-SA Standards Board Patent Committee Administrator at or visit
This slide set is available at
Robert Moskowitz, Verizon

8. Call for Potentially Essential Patents
November 2011
Call for Potentially Essential Patents
If anyone in this meeting is personally aware of the holder of any patent claims that are potentially essential to implementation of the proposed standard(s) under consideration by this group and that are not already the subject of an Accepted Letter of Assurance:
Either speak up now or
Provide the chair of this group with the identity of the holder(s) of any and all such claims as soon as possible or
Cause an LOA to be submitted
Robert Moskowitz, Verizon

9. Minutes Review and vote on July 2011 minutes
November 2011
Minutes
Review and vote on July 2011 minutes
kmp-KMPIG-minutes-for- September-2011.doc
Robert Moskowitz, Verizon

10. Goals Produce a Recommended Practice Dependencies
November 2011
Goals
Produce a Recommended Practice
Use 'existing' frames to carry KMP
Avoid long time line for amendment
Dependencies
TG4e Information Elements

11. Discussion Information Elements How many IE IDs needed?
November 2011
Discussion
Information Elements
How many IE IDs needed?
One!
What is max size of value pre 4g?
What is max size post 4g?
How to support chaining
IE format for support
Frame flow for support
Use of forced ACKs

12. Discussion Information Elements Other points to discuss
November 2011
Discussion
Information Elements
Managing retransmissions
Missed ACKs?
Other points to discuss

13. Information Element Content
November 2011
Information Element Content
Control Field
1 bit Chaining Flag (yes, last/only one)
Chaining REQUIRES frame ACK
7 bit KMP type/Chain count
First packet provides KMP type
(HIP, IKEv2, SAE, 802.1X, 4-Way- Handshake, vendor)
Chain count
C=0 is 2nd fragment
C=1 is 3rd fragment

14. Information Element Content
November 2011
Information Element Content
Control Field
7 bit count with ave 65 bytes Value yield 8KB KMP datagram
Warning on Processing
Last packet in chain may be indistinguishable from a 1 packet only transmission
Will be addressed in the state machine

15. November 2011
PAR
kmp-Key-Management-Protocol-PAR.doc
kmp-kmp-5C-draft.doc
Can a single recommended practice by applied to 15.4, 15.6, and 15.7?
15.6 has requested to opt out
Special text for differences for each?
What are concerns of other groups?
Comments from .1, .11, and .21

16. November 2011
Next Steps