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

Re: IVs, summary of discussion

To: Phil Karn <karn@qualcomm.com>
Subject: Re: IVs, summary of discussion
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@imsi.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 1994 08:04:56 -0400
Cc: housley@spyrus.com, ipsec@ans.net
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 30 Aug 1994 17:28:17 PDT." <199408310028.RAA28943@servo.qualcomm.com>
Reply-To: perry@imsi.com


Phil Karn says:
> Once again, I don't know of any IPv4 transport protocol, existing or
> proposed, that won't require *some* changes to operate over IPv6.
> IPSEC won't be any worse. A totally interchangeable IPSEC is a
> chimera.

Perhaps true, but at the very least I'd like to specify both versions
of the protocol from the start so that IPv6 implementation authors can
get to work. It would be nice if there were no gratuitous differences,
although differences based on real need are of course a different matter.

Perry

References:

Re: IVs, summary of discussion

From: Phil Karn <karn@qualcomm.com>

Prev by Date: IPSEC requirements
Next by Date: Re: IVs, summary of discussion
Prev by thread: Re: IPsecv4 and IPsecv6
Next by thread: Re: IVs, summary of discussion
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread