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

Re: IPSEC requirements

To: bsimpson@morningstar.com
Subject: Re: IPSEC requirements
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.cc.titech.ac.jp>
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 94 15:33:21 JST
Cc: ipsec@ans.net
In-Reply-To: <3129.bill.simpson@um.cc.umich.edu>; from "William Allen Simpson" at Sep 4, 94 3:55 pm

> Please call it something else.  Most of us don't mean this when we say
> "firewall".  A firewall is an IP level concept.  Even peeking into the
> IP Protocol field is still an IP level concept.

Firewalls are quite appropriately implemented to look at port numbers
in TCP/UDP headers, not IP headers.

So, please don't try to misspecify them.

It's still OK to have a transport layer IP-SEC field in IP header
for implementation efficiency.

							Masataka Ohta

References:

Re: IPSEC requirements

From: "William Allen Simpson" <bill.simpson@um.cc.umich.edu>

Prev by Date: Re: IPSEC requirements
Next by Date: Re: IPSEC requirements
Prev by thread: Re: IPSEC requirements
Next by thread: Re: IPSEC requirements
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread