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

Re: >FWD- Re- FYI IPSEC WG C

To: Paul_Lambert@poncho.phx.sectel.mot.com (Paul Lambert)
Subject: Re: >FWD- Re- FYI IPSEC WG C
From: "Beast (Donald E. Eastlake, 3rd)" <dee@skidrow.pa.dec.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Dec 92 17:38:30 -0500
Cc: Russ_Housley.McLean_CSD@xerox.com (Russ Housley.McLean CSD), dee@skidrow.ljo.dec.com (Donald E. Eastlake, 3rd), ipsec@ans.net (ip security mailing list)
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 07 Dec 92 13:49:21 MST." <00112.2806581015.29575@poncho.phx.sectel.mot.com>
Reply-To: dee@skidrow.ljo.dec.com


From:  Paul_Lambert@poncho.phx.sectel.mot.com (Paul Lambert)
>Donald,
>
>Do you have a specific change you would like to see made in the charter,
>or can your comments be addressed within the scope we have documented?
> 
>I agree that we need to have some form of *manual* key management for
>the initial IPSP draft.  

If the current charter is interpreted broadly, and this "application
level" key management protocol can be interpreted to allow
consideration of DNS retrieval of public keys or agreement via a new
protocol number (or with new ICMPs) to either use manual key
distribution or securely exchange sessions keys and the like, then I
guess I can live with the charter.  This means I assume that I can
submit a proposal which includes the possibility of host A sending a
datagram to host B which is marked as authenticated using a public key
retrievable from the DNS and the proposal will not be rejected merely
on the grounds that it is outside the charter.

Donald

Prev by Date: Re: >Final IPSEC Charter
Next by Date: IPSP Alternatives
Prev by thread: Re: >FWD- Re- FYI IPSEC WG C
Next by thread: Re: >Final IPSEC Charter
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread