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

Re: (IPng) Re: Proposed message on perfect forward security


In the interests of getting this settled, I would accept the compromise.


>  From tytso@MIT.EDU Wed Mar 15 16:01:12 1995
>  To: Danny.Nessett@Eng
>  Cc: hinden@servo.ipsilon.com, ipng@sunroof.Eng.Sun.COM, ipsec@ans.net
>  Subject: Re: (IPng) Re: Proposed message on perfect forward security
>  Address: 1 Amherst St., Cambridge, MA 02139
>  Phone: (617) 253-8091
>     Date: Wed, 15 Mar 1995 15:04:48 -0800
>     From: Danny.Nessett@Eng.Sun.COM (Dan Nessett)
>     I don't agree. Ran has stated that he will clarify the text of the security
>     architecture document so that it is clear the "reserved" SAIDs can be
>     allocated by the IANA for key management purposes. Fine. That removes one
>     impediment. However, the draft still says the architecture is not intended
>     for in-band keying. 
>  Well, that suggests one possible compromise --- which is that draft is
>  modified to remove the comment deprecating in-band keying, but also
>  stating that the intention is that the expectation is that the base
>  level key exchange method will be using an out-of-band key exchange
>  method.  
>  Is this something that everyone can live with?
>  						- Ted