[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
No Subject
(V3.1.1)
id xma011572; Mon, 16 Sep 96 15:03:15 -0400
Received: from localhost (perry@localhost) by jekyll.piermont.com
(8.7.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id PAA23198; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 15:05:21 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199609161905.PAA23198@jekyll.piermont.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: jekyll.piermont.com: Host perry@localhost didn't
use HELO protocol
To: "ozan s. yigit" <oz@border.com>
Cc: ipsec@TIS.COM
Subject: Re: Using SKIP as inspiration, not as gospel
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 16 Sep 1996 14:17:31 EDT."
<96Sep16.141629edt.18437-2@janus.border.com>
Reply-To: perry@piermont.com
X-Reposting-Policy: redistribute only with permission
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 15:05:21 -0400
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>
Sender: ipsec-approval@neptune.tis.com
Precedence: bulk
"ozan s. yigit" writes:
> > Some of us don't like the fact that SKIP does not play nicely with the
> > IPSec model.
>
> i have no idea what this means. i am a relative newcomer to the IPSec
> forum, so perhaps you could clarify...
I don't want to get in to the whole thing, but as just one part, SKIP
does not operate in a model that permits multiple associations between
two hosts, which is needed if you have mutually suspicious users on
different transport connections.
Perry
Follow-Ups: