Skip to main content

Handover Keying (HOKEY) Architecture Design

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:


From: The IESG <>
To: IETF-Announce <>
Cc: RFC Editor <>,
    hokey mailing list <>,
    hokey chair <>
Subject: Document Action: 'Handover Keying (HOKEY) Architecture Design' to Informational RFC (draft-ietf-hokey-arch-design-11.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Handover Keying (HOKEY) Architecture Design'
  (draft-ietf-hokey-arch-design-11.txt) as an Informational RFC

This document is the product of the Handover Keying Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Stephen Farrell and Sean Turner.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:

Ballot Text

Technical Summary

   The Handover Keying (HOKEY) Working Group seeks to minimize handover
   delay due to authentication when a peer moves from one point of
   attachment to another.  Work has been progressed on two different
   approaches to reduce handover delay: early authentication (so that
   authentication does not need to be performed during handover), and
   reuse of cryptographic material generated during an initial
   authentication to save time during re-authentication.  A starting
   assumption is that the mobile host or "peer" is initially
   authenticated using the Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP),
   executed between the peer and an EAP server as defined in RFC 3748.

   This document specifies the HOKEY architecture.  Specifically, it
   describes design objectives, the functional environment within which
   handover keying operates, the functions to be performed by the HOKEY
   architecture itself, and the assignment of those functions to
   architectural components.  It goes on to illustrate the operation of
   the architecture within various deployment scenarios that are
   described more fully in other documents produced by the HOKEY Working

Working Group Summary

     The document is a product of the Hokey working group. The document has 
      working group consensus.

Document Quality
       The document provides the guideline for implementors to use different functions, components and protocol
       summarized in this document to adapt to different usage scenarios 
       and situations and is therefore not subject to implementation.
       Also this document has gotten sufficient review from people with both
       OPS and Security background. The quality of the document is good.


     Tina Tsou is the document shepherd
     Stephen Farrell is the responsible AD.

RFC Editor Note