[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Encapsulation vs options

To: Russ_Housley.McLean_CSD@xerox.com
Subject: Re: Encapsulation vs options
From: Stephen D Crocker <crocker@TIS.COM>
Date: Fri, 04 Dec 92 11:11:46 -0500
Cc: teb@saturn.sys.acc.com, ipsec@ans.net
In-Reply-To: Your message of Fri, 04 Dec 92 07:15:30 -0800. <" 4-Dec-92 10:15:21".*.Russ_Housley.McLean_CSD@Xerox.com>

Russ,

Indeed I was vocal and indeed I pushed for limiting the scope of the
WG so we have a chance of reaching closure soon.  I also said we need
key management as well as the data level security protocol so people
could actually implement and deploy this in some orderly fashion.
Those were my main concerns as Area Director.  I also attempted to
convey the expectations I have based on my particular view of the
world, viz focus on layer 3 versus layer 4, use PEM style
certificates.  These reflect my individual intuition and taste, but
need not be accepted by the group.

It's inherent in the process that it's hard to distinguish between
things said as an official and things said as an individual.  I
apologize for not being clearer about this.


Steve

References:

Re: Encapsulation vs options

From: Russ_Housley.McLean_CSD@xerox.com

Prev by Date: Re: Encapsulation vs options
Next by Date: Re: >yet another protocol fo
Prev by thread: Re: Encapsulation vs options
Next by thread: Re: Encapsulation vs options
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread