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

Re: (IPng 5759) Re: [Karen Seo: Thomas Narten -- clarification,etc.]

To: Bill Sommerfeld <sommerfeld@orchard.arlington.ma.us>
Subject: Re: (IPng 5759) Re: [Karen Seo: Thomas Narten -- clarification,etc.]
From: Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>
Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 11:41:27 -0400
Cc: Steve Deering <deering@cisco.com>, "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@MIT.EDU>, Robert Elz <kre@munnari.oz.au>, Thomas Narten <narten@raleigh.ibm.com>, jis@MIT.EDU, ipsec@tis.com, ipng@sunroof.eng.sun.com
In-Reply-To: <199805041525.PAA19130@orchard.arlington.ma.us>
References: Your message of "Mon, 4 May 1998 09:27:05 -0400 ." <v03110702b173724b967a@[128.33.238.120]>
Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com

Bill,

I believe that the Arch Doc considers a BITW Ipsec device to be a host
implementation in that context (at least for a single homed host).  If the
same device is used in front of a router, then it inherits the security
gateway requirements.

Steve

Follow-Ups:

Re: (IPng 5759) Re: [Karen Seo: Thomas Narten -- clarification, etc.]

From: Bill Sommerfeld <sommerfeld@orchard.arlington.ma.us>

References:

Re: (IPng 5759) Re: [Karen Seo: Thomas Narten -- clarification, etc.]

From: Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>

Re: (IPng 5759) Re: [Karen Seo: Thomas Narten -- clarification, etc.]

From: Bill Sommerfeld <sommerfeld@orchard.arlington.ma.us>

Prev by Date: Re: (IPng 5759) Re: [Karen Seo: Thomas Narten -- clarification, etc.]
Next by Date: Re: (IPng 5759) Re: [Karen Seo: Thomas Narten -- clarification, etc.]
Prev by thread: Re: (IPng 5759) Re: [Karen Seo: Thomas Narten -- clarification, etc.]
Next by thread: Re: (IPng 5759) Re: [Karen Seo: Thomas Narten -- clarification, etc.]
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread