[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Calling the question: derived vs. explicit IV
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 1997 08:35:29 -0700
From: "Scott G. Kelly" <scott@fet.com>
Not trying to be quarrelsome, just trying to understand: DOI *does*
apply to manually configured SA's, right? I mean, it's reasonable to say
that someone might someday manually configure concurrent SA's which
apply to different DOI's, right?
I think there's a major misunderstanding about what the term DOI means.
A particular DOI defines the messages and exchanges used in the ISAKMP
protocol. As such, if you're not using ISAKMP, you can't be using "DOI"
in the ISAKMP context.
I think you're trying to talk about something completely different;
perhaps it would be helpful if you could precisely define the term which
you're trying to use? We can then either come up with the proper term,
or if one doesn't exist, we can invent one. :-)
But I think the major difficulty is that what you mean by "DOI" isn't
is not the same as the definition of DOI as used by the ISAKMP
protocol. As such, this is bound to cause endless confusion which can
be headed off at the pass by defining our terms carefully at the outset.
- Ted
Follow-Ups:
References: