[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (IPng) Re: Proposed message on perfect forward security
Ted,
In the interests of getting this settled, I would accept the compromise.
Dan
> 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
>