[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ISAKMP Oakley resolution and ipsec doi document questions
Edward A. Russell <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Baiju Patel (email@example.com) said on 6/13/97 at 8:11 AM
> >2. in the doi document, who's port number is specified in
> >the identification payload? (initiator or reviver?)
> >The protocol ID and port are also in the field marked
> >reserved in the ISAKMP document. Is this intentional?
> >In my view, this should be consistent.
> The port is 500 for sending
> The port is 500 for receiving
> The port is 500 ONLY.
> I believe this came out of Memphis.
I think he was asking about the protocol and port fields in the ID
payload (right Baiju?). I think those fields are really only of interest
in phase II when used as proxy id's. In that case the ID would be
the protocol and port of the intended service. Example, if I'm telnetting
to ideal.jf.intel.com the ID type of IDur would be ID_FQDN, the protocol
would be TCP, the port would be 23, and the identification data would
And you're right. The documents should be consistent. Next rev they