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

Re: Comments on CRACK




This conversation is getting a little bit out of hand --- and is one of
the reasons why I have been trying to push hard to make sure IPSRA
BOF/WG gets started.

We're arguing over protocols when we haven't agreed what the basic
requirements are; as a result, we have multiple different incompatible
protocols (including more than one version of XAUTH), all trying to
solve the same problem, and people talking past one another about what's
important and what's not.

In my opinion, what we need to do is call a halt, take a deep breath,
and return to basics --- to wit, a formal requirements document.  This
may take time, but it's likely to be the one that's most likely to yield
forward progress.  Xauth and its sister contenders have been on the
table for a long time, and we haven't been able to come to consensus so
far; does anyone really think that we will be able to obtain consensus
by continuing this path?

In any case, that was the initial reasoning behind spawning an IPSEC RA
BOF --- namely, that in the process of chartering a working group, we
could be a bit more intentional about starting over with requirements,
so that we have some hope of actually reaching consensus and not talking
past one another.

There have been some who have objected to this saying that one of the
co-chairs of the IPSRA bof is the the author of one of the existing
protocols, and so therefore he might be biased.  I will point out that
there are very few qualified people who might have been chosen that
wouldn't be biased one way or the other, and it's one of the reasons why
Area Directors have oversight responsibilitys of wg chairs.  I encourage
people to give the IPSRA bof (and hopefully wg) chairs a chance; you can
always complain to Jeff or Marcus if you feel that they are being
unfair.

That being said, with the second IPSRA bof being scheduled for
Washington, I would like to ask that discussion that is within the scope
of the IPSRA be moved to the IPSRA mailing list.  I would further
encourage Roy and Sara (although it's their show) to try to push the
discussion back to the level of formal requirements, as a method that
may be much more likely of making forward progress than the current
series of discussion.  Discussion of what the formal charter for IPSRA
might also be appropriate, given that Washington will be the 2nd time
the IPSRA bof has had a chance to meet.

					- Ted
					IPSEC wg chair


References: