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

Re: Concerns

I am working on a solution. Expect to hear from me late on Thursday.

                            -Jeff Schiller
                             IESG Area Director for Security



Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 17:51:42 -0400
Message-Id: <9609172151.AA16998@dcl.MIT.EDU>
From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: John Lawler <jlawler@vpnet.com>
Cc: ipsec@TIS.COM, "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: John Lawler's message of Tue, 17 Sep 1996 16:33:04 -0700,
	<2.2.32.19960917233304.00687780@best.com>
Subject: Re: Concerns
Address: 1 Amherst St., Cambridge, MA 02139
Phone: (617) 253-8091
Sender: ipsec-approval@neptune.tis.com
Precedence: bulk

   Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 16:33:04 -0700
   From: John Lawler <jlawler@vpnet.com>

   That is not the case. I estimated the attendance for the votes at about
   250-300 people (almost all of whom said they had read both specs, BTW), and
   each vote showed half the hands in the room voting yes, and half the room
   voting no, for each question asked. There seemed to be very few abstentions
   at all, so I cannot agree with your characterization of either SKIP or
   ISAKMP having the support of only a small group. As to the particular vote
   you mention, I believe that only perhaps 12-15 people raised their hands as
   having no preference (which shocked me, by the way--I also expected small
   core groups and lots of abstentions).

Hmm... my recollection of the IETF montreal straw poll was about 25-30
people saying that they wanted SKIP, and about the same number wanting
ISAKMP, with the rest abstaining.  I talked to Jeff about this earlier
last week, and that was his recollection as well.....

							- Ted




Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 22:39:18 GMT
Message-Id: <199609172239.WAA14168@carp.morningstar.com>
From: Karl Fox <karl@ascend.com>
To: John Lawler <jlawler@vpnet.com>
Cc: ipsec@TIS.COM, "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Concerns 
In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960917233304.00687780@best.com>
References: <2.2.32.19960917233304.00687780@best.com>
Reply-To: Karl Fox <karl@ascend.com>
Organization: Ascend Communications
Sender: ipsec-approval@neptune.tis.com
Precedence: bulk

John Lawler writes:
> >Well, at the IPSEC wg, what I saw was a small group of people who wanted
> >SKIP, a small group of people who wanted ISAKMP (and I won't try to
> >characterize which of the two small groups were bigger, more technically
> >comptentent, or has better-substantiated paternity), but the vast
> >majority of the room were from vendor-types who said, "we don't care
> >which one you choose; we're not competent to make that choice.
>
> That is not the case. I estimated the attendance for the votes at about
> 250-300 people (almost all of whom said they had read both specs, BTW), and
> each vote showed half the hands in the room voting yes, and half the room
> voting no, for each question asked. There seemed to be very few abstentions
> at all, so I cannot agree with your characterization of either SKIP or
> ISAKMP having the support of only a small group.

This is not what I saw.  I saw only a handful voting for SKIP, a few
more for ISAKMP/Oakley, and the vast majority with their hands down.

> As to the particular vote you mention, I believe that only perhaps
> 12-15 people raised their hands as having no preference

This is also true.  Most of the people didn't raise their hand for
anything.
-- 
Karl Fox, servant of God, employee of Ascend Communications
3518 Riverside Drive, Suite 101, Columbus, Ohio 43221   +1 614 326 6841
References: