[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Windows 2000 and Cicsco router interoperability
>Mark,
>Ah, but the binding is not lost. As I have said to you and on this list
>before, there is a 1:1 correlation between the SA, the l2tp session, the
>"user-authorized" PPP session, and thus the access control and policy
>for that user. This is key to the way l2tp+ipsec is intended to operate.
>If you wish, we could even include a section in the l2tp-security draft
>that spells this out in a more direct manner. The omission of this
>specific text is only due to the fact that it so plainly obvious to
>those who have lived and worked in the traditional dialup space for
>years. Perhaps it is this kind of input we need, however, to ensure that
>we cover all points of reference.
And, I have noted before, we have only the assurance of vendors on
this important security issue, because no RFCcs specify how this is
done. Personally, I'm more comfortable with a standards-specified
approach to such security critical issues, rather than the assurances
I have received from the L2TP community that "well, everybody does
the right thing in their products and we all know it ..."
Steve
Follow-Ups:
References: