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

Re: draft-ietf-ipsec-des-md5-00.txt

To: sommerfeld@apollo.hp.com, hughes@hughes.network.com
Subject: Re: draft-ietf-ipsec-des-md5-00.txt
From: pau@watson.ibm.com
Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 10:23:36 -0400
Cc: ipsec@TIS.COM
MMDF-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at neptune.TIS.COM
Sender: ipsec-approval@neptune.tis.com

Hi, this msg is a response to David's, Bill's and James's msgs.

I do agree using uni-directional keys is a better solution. It is also
easy to do, as David pointed out in his msg. In fact, we have been using 
it for a while in our lab and (soon to be) in our product.

My problem is that I don't see uni-directional keys being made mandatory
in RFC1825, ISAKMP draft 4 nor Oakley draft. I may have misread them.
If any body sees it, please kindly point it to me.

Thank you.

Regards, Pau-Chen

Follow-Ups:

Re: draft-ietf-ipsec-des-md5-00.txt

From: Ran Atkinson <rja@cisco.com>

Re: draft-ietf-ipsec-des-md5-00.txt

From: Jim Hughes <hughes@hughes.network.com>

Prev by Date: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipsec-ah-hmac-sha-00.txt
Next by Date: Re: draft-ietf-ipsec-esp-des-md5-01.txt
Prev by thread: Re: draft-ietf-ipsec-des-md5-00.txt
Next by thread: Re: draft-ietf-ipsec-des-md5-00.txt
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread