[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Concerns
practically everyone says:
> That's not the way I remember it...
Maybe it isn't important whether we all agree on whether a show of
hands was asked on each KMP proposal, or on the absolute magnitude of
the number of hands that went up. Let's all chill out for a day and
see what the AD has to say tomorrow.
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 13:01:18 -0400
To: Hilarie Orman <ho@earth.hpc.org>, danmcd@pacific-86.eng.sun.com
From: Robert Moskowitz <rgm3@chrysler.com>
Subject: Re: Using SKIP as inspiration, not a
Cc: ipsec@TIS.COM
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: ipsec-approval@neptune.tis.com
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <9609181350.aa23182@neptune.TIS.COM>
At 09:47 AM 9/17/96 -0400, Hilarie Orman wrote:
>Is there then consensus for including in-line keys with a non-PFS key
>determination mode as a required component of a key distribution
>protocol?
There are many uses of this within an organization. Accessing PLCs (those
robot controllers on the assembly line), hubs, and some router things like
stat collection.
I have often felt that such an approach is just what SNMPv2 needs.
But in the total universe of needs this is juct an important use.
Robert Moskowitz
Chrysler Corporation
(810) 758-8212