[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: lengths of some specifiers
Scott G. Kelly wrote:
>
> Call me a stickler for consistency, but I'm a little baffled: why do we
> require 2 octets to represent SA attributes which are unlikely to ever
> require more than a few elements of enumeration, (e.g. key/sa lifetypes,
> replay protection), yet define something so prolific as encryption or
> hashing tranforms with only one octet? Won't we be sorry if we don't
> allocate 2 octets for these?
>
I should also have noted that we're apparently doing the same thing with
the security protocol identifier (ESP/AH). I could be convinced that we
should let the others go at one octet (even though it seems
inconsistent) since they are defined on a per-protocol basis, but
leaving the security proto ID at one octet seems short-sighted...
Scott
Follow-Ups:
References: