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

RE: Comments on "Hybrid Auth. mode for IKE"

To: Roy Pereira <rpereira@TimeStep.com>
Subject: RE: Comments on "Hybrid Auth. mode for IKE"
From: Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 18:08:46 -0400
Cc: ipsec@tis.com
In-Reply-To: <319A1C5F94C8D11192DE00805FBBADDF2937DB@exchange.timestep.com>
Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com

Roy,

I don't mean to suggest that we should engineer on the fly.  However, I do
object to statements justifying XAUTH design features based on purported
shortcomings of IKE and thye general IPsec authentication model. If folks
make such comments and they're not substantiated (or just wrong), I think
it apprppriate to comment on that in the context of this mailing list.  Do
you disagree/

Steve

References:

RE: Comments on "Hybrid Auth. mode for IKE"

From: Roy Pereira <rpereira@TimeStep.com>

Prev by Date: PFKEYv2 and IKEd.
Next by Date: Examples?
Prev by thread: RE: Comments on "Hybrid Auth. mode for IKE"
Next by thread: RE: Comments on "Hybrid Auth. mode for IKE"
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread