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

RE: Internet Drafts -- AH and ESP specs

To: Roy Pereira <rpereira@TimeStep.com>
Subject: RE: Internet Drafts -- AH and ESP specs
From: Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 16:37:10 -0400
Cc: "'ipsec@tis.com'" <ipsec@tis.com>
In-Reply-To: <c=US%a=_%p=TimeStep_Corpora%l=TSNTSRV2-971003155343Z-2499@tsntsrv2.timestep.com>
Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com

Roy,

	The AH and ESP specs call for the receiver to use a NOTIFY to
inform the sender of the receiver's intent to employ anti-replay measures,
so it is not a negotiation. If you look at the last messages on the topic,
dated 8/26 (from Dan Harkins( and 8/28 (from me), the resolution was to
make use of this form of notification (proposed by Dan), and the only
unresolved point was whether to make the transmission of the NOTIFY a MUST
or a SHOULD.

Steve

Follow-Ups:

Re: Internet Drafts -- AH and ESP specs

From: "C. Harald Koch" <chk@utcc.utoronto.ca>

References:

RE: Internet Drafts -- AH and ESP specs

From: Roy Pereira <rpereira@TimeStep.com>

Prev by Date: Expiry based on traffic (kilobytes)
Next by Date: Re: Internet Drafts -- AH and ESP specs
Prev by thread: RE: Internet Drafts -- AH and ESP specs
Next by thread: Re: Internet Drafts -- AH and ESP specs
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread