[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Working group requirements
As long as we are on the subject, I would like to suggest that we make
support for RSVP a requirement for the key management protocol. Support
for RSVP is not difficult and most of the current proposals will already
support it. Those that do not could be made to without too much effort.
The requirement is basically that unique SPIs be available for each flow.
A draft by Lou Berger <lberger@bbn.com> and Tim O'Malley <timo@bbn.com> is
promissed to be available soon.
On another topic related to requirements, I do not agree that Photuris
meets the working group requirements. For example, section 1.4 of RFC 1825
is nigh impossible to acomodate for an interoperable implementation based
on the Photuris draft and the extentions draft. The entire draft(s) has
become unwieldy.
Dave
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Carrel | E-mail: carrel@cisco.com
Security Development, cisco Systems | phone: (408) 526-5207
170 W. Tasman Drive | fax: (408) 526-4952
San Jose, CA 95134-1706 |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------