No Subject

(V3.1.1)
	id xma004641; Mon, 19 Aug 96 11:00:18 -0400
Received: from localhost (perry@localhost) by jekyll.piermont.com
(8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA11313; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 11:02:21 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199608191502.LAA11313@jekyll.piermont.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: jekyll.piermont.com: Host perry@localhost didn't
use HELO protocol
To: "Mitchell C. Nelson" <nelson@mcn.netsec.com>
Cc: ipsec@TIS.COM, netsec@panix.com
Subject: Re: "user" and "network layer" security mechanisms. 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 16 Aug 1996 16:55:16 EDT."
             <199608162055.QAA01070@mcn.netsec.com> 
Reply-To: perry@piermont.com
X-Reposting-Policy: redistribute only with permission
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 1996 11:02:16 -0400
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>
Sender: ipsec-approval@neptune.tis.com
Precedence: bulk


"Mitchell C. Nelson" writes:
> Language in the Internet draft IPSEC architecture, and in its predecessor
> RFC 1825, refer to "IP-layer security".  This is in itself consistent with
> lanquage in the IPSEC charter that refers to a "security protocol in the
> network layer".  However, several contributions to this discussion group
> as well other lanquage in the IPSEC docments, refer to the term "user". 
> This is curious.
> 
> There is no concept of "user" at the IP layer (i.e. the network layer).  

You seem to have missed the point, which is that IPSEC has this notion
of "security association" (actually, now its called "Security
Parameters" and has the associated "Security Parameters Index").

Why don't you go through the archives instead of making guesses about
what you think IPSEC does?

Perry

---

• Prev by Date: Re: "user" and "network layer" security.
• Next by Date: Re:
• Prev by thread: No Subject
• Next by thread: Apologies
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread