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

Re: is manual keying mandatory

To: bkavsan@ire-ma.com
Subject: Re: is manual keying mandatory
From: Steve Sneddon <sned@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1998 17:22:14 -0800
Cc: Dave Carrel <carrel@ipsec.org>, "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@MIT.EDU>, ipsec@tis.com
Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com

I totally agree - no changes & no delay.

I wasn't proposing changing the MUST. I was only trying to understand the
parameters on what had to "work" in order for an implementation to be called
"compliant". I think I understand that now from the information from the
respondents, and the lack thereof from others.

Thanks folks, and sorry for any consternation I may have caused.

At 05:47 PM 3/23/98 -0500, Bronislav Kavsan wrote:
>Dave Carrel wrote:
>
>> We all know why manual keying doesn't scale and we
>> all know why it's impractical in most real world situations.
>
>Just admitting this makes this MUST a big joke....As far as the danger of
delaying
>the documents - I agree - we shouldn't delay.
>--
>Bronislav Kavsan
>IRE Secure Solutions, Inc.
>100 Conifer Hill Drive  Suite 513
>Danvers, MA  01923
>voice: 978-739-2384
>http://www.ire.com
>
>
>
>
>

Prev by Date: Re: is manual keying mandatory
Next by Date: Re: is manual keying mandatory
Prev by thread: RE: is manual keying mandatory
Next by thread: Wordsmithing Party?
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread