[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Comments on ISAKMP/Oakley
>>> 2.4.1. Security Association Payload
>>> Is the "Payload Length" field *really* supposed to be specified in
>>> four-octet units, or should it be in octets as all the other
payloads
>>> are?
>>>
>> I believe it should be in octets. It seems unlikely that a SA payload
>> will ever be large enough to require a length in 4-octet units.
>
>IPv6 jumbograms?????
Yep. -- Frank
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 1996 11:53:52 -0400
To: John Gilmore <gnu@toad.com>, ipsec@TIS.COM, gnu@toad.com
From: Robert Moskowitz <rgm3@chrysler.com>
Subject: Re: DNS? was Key Management
Sender: ipsec-approval@neptune.tis.com
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <9608151650.aa26859@neptune.TIS.COM>
At 04:55 PM 8/14/96 -0700, John Gilmore wrote:
>
>I also think we should focus on shipping standards that hit the sweet
>spot (most gain for least pain), which includes securing communications
>among all the hosts with fixed IP addresses. If dynamically assigned
>IP addresses are easy, throw 'em in; if not, leave them for the next
>round of standards. Since everyone seems to think they're hard,
>let's leave them for next time, and secure the large fraction of
>the Internet that we know how to do now.
John, there are about 8,000 productive parts suppliers in the auto industry
and 17 oems. Chyrsler has already deployed 5,000 notebooks.
I could throw in NADA (dealers) and pick up 10,000 businesses, but then the
Ford notebooks will tilt the balance.
I think that dynamic addressing exceeds fix addressing unless we deal with
split horizon DNS firewall traversal (with NAT thrown in for good measure).
Day one, I've got lot more dynamic than I have fixed.
And oh, we want to be in pilot 4Q96 :)
Robert Moskowitz
Chrysler Corporation
(810) 758-8212
--
John C. Kelley
System Administrator (301) 854-6889
Trusted Information Systems, Inc. (301) 854-5363 FAX
3060 Washington Road johnk@tis.com (work)
Glenwood, MD 21738 johnk@radix.net (play)
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 1996 11:53:49 -0400
To: "Mark S. Schneider" <mss@tycho.ncsc.mil>, naganand@ftp.com
From: Robert Moskowitz <rgm3@chrysler.com>
Subject: Re: Comments on ISAKMP/Oakley
Cc: ipsec@TIS.COM, mss@tycho.ncsc.mil, wdm@tycho.ncsc.mil,
sjt@tycho.ncsc.mil, mjs@terisa.com
Sender: ipsec-approval@neptune.tis.com
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <9608151701.aa27111@neptune.TIS.COM>
At 07:39 AM 8/12/96 EDT, Mark S. Schneider wrote:
>> From: Naganand Doraswamy <naganand@ftp.com>
>>
>> These are mostly implemetation type comments:
>>
>> 2.4.1. Security Association Payload
>> Is the "Payload Length" field *really* supposed to be specified in
>> four-octet units, or should it be in octets as all the other payloads
>> are?
>>
>
> I believe it should be in octets. It seems unlikely that a SA payload
> will ever be large enough to require a length in 4-octet units.
IPv6 jumbograms?????
Robert Moskowitz
Chrysler Corporation
(810) 758-8212