Re: Please review draft-ietf-pppext-l2tp-sec-03.txt

[Patrice Calhoun <Patrice.Calhoun@Eng.Sun.Com>]

> X-Sender: rgm-sec@homebase.htt-consult.com
> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 12:36:26 -0500
> To: ipsec@tis.com
> From: Robert Moskowitz <rgm-sec@htt-consult.com>
> Subject: Please review draft-ietf-pppext-l2tp-sec-03.txt
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> 
> I know we are busy, but the L2TP crowd is working on their use of IPsec for
> protecting L2TP sessions.
> 
> I do not mean at all to question the abilities of the L2TP wg, but I
> suspect that there are many people here that are not on that list, and may
> want to study this, the first use of IPsec by another wg.
> 
> One interesting comment I have of this draft, is it does not actually
> reference any of the IPsec documents.

Bob,

I believe that you meant draft-ietf-pppext-l2tp-security-0x.txt. The draft you 
mentioned discussed security if no IP is available (i.e. L2TP over native ATM).

PatC

---

• Prev by Date: Re: is manual keying mandatory
• Next by Date: Re: is manual keying mandatory
• Prev by thread: Re: Please review draft-ietf-pppext-l2tp-sec-03.txt
• Next by thread: FW: is manual keying mandatory
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread