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

Re: IPSP requirements

To: ipsec@ans.net
Subject: Re: IPSP requirements
From: colella@nist.gov
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 93 16:22:05 EDT
Cc: colella@nist.gov
Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
Reply-To: colella@nist.gov
Sub-Organization: Computer Systems Laboratory (CSL)

Folks,

> As long as we all seem to agree that we are trying to identify the 
> requirements for IPSP, and that we agree that conformance to NLSP 
> is definitely not one of those requirements, then isn't it premature 
> to consider using the NLSP formats? Shouldn't we agree on the 
> requirements first, then decide what format to use to implement 
> those requirements?

It's certainly sensible to decide on the requirements first.  I
assume from the email I've been watching that this part of the
discussion is in progress.

> Once we do get to the format specification stage, I agree with Ran -
> forget NLSP.  ....

I find this statement a bit curious, given the above.  This certainly
sounds like a proposal about formats to me :^).

--Richard

Prev by Date: Re: IPv4 Security
Next by Date: Re: IPv4 Security
Prev by thread: IPSP requirements
Next by thread: FYI: NLSP comments...
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread