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

Re: WG last call for IPv4 AH and ESP

To: atkinson@itd.nrl.navy.mil
Subject: Re: WG last call for IPv4 AH and ESP
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@imsi.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 1995 12:00:20 -0500
Cc: William Allen Simpson <bsimpson@morningstar.com>, ipsec@ans.net
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 20 Feb 1995 11:46:10 EST." <9502201146.ZM5125@bodhi>
Reply-To: perry@imsi.com


Ran Atkinson says:
>   I believe it would be a mistake to mandate that users must use
> one of (auth inside encryption) or (auth outside encryption).

I had no such intentions; this was only for purposes of a base
security transform for encryption plus authentication. I agree that
people can and will come up with better mechanisms in the future and
since the architecture we stole from you is flexible enough to permit
that we have no cause to try to lower the functionality.

However, for the sake of interoperability, we DO need a set of base
transforms, and I'm trying to define one here.

Perry

References:

Re: WG last call for IPv4 AH and ESP

From: Ran Atkinson <rja@bodhi.itd.nrl.navy.mil>

Prev by Date: Re: WG last call for IPv4 AH and ESP
Next by Date: Re: comments on Photuris
Prev by thread: Re: WG last call for IPv4 AH and ESP
Next by thread: Re: WG last call for IPv4 AH and ESP
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread