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

Re: Anonymous IKE phase 1 -mode

To: William Dixon <wdixon@microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: Anonymous IKE phase 1 -mode
From: Tamir Zegman <zegman@checkpoint.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 12:00:15 +0200
CC: ipsec-list <ipsec@lists.tislabs.com>
Organization: Check Point
References: <3C3175FCC945D211B65100805F1580890A487448@RED-MSG-07>
Sender: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com

Hybrid does exactly that (with the exception that it mandates that XAuth would
immediately follow).

William Dixon wrote:

> It would be very useful to authenticate the server only, keeping the client
> user or machine ID anonymous, ala normal HTTPS usage of SSL (without client
> auth).  Does anyone remember why this wasn't provided in IKE ?  I read
> through the Jan 99 SSL vs. IPSec and Vital's portable client credential
> comments way back, but haven't seen the reasons why IKE didn't provide a
> mode for this.  -Wm
>

References:

RE: Anonymous IKE phase 1 -mode

From: William Dixon <wdixon@microsoft.com>

Prev by Date: RE: Anonymous IKE phase 1 -mode
Next by Date: Re: FIPS 186 and X9.42: One of these things is not like the other
Prev by thread: RE: Anonymous IKE phase 1 -mode
Next by thread: IPComp rfc2393bis-00
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread