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

Re: Death to AH? (was: Reasons for AH & ESP )

To: Michael Richardson <mcr@solidum.com>
Subject: Re: Death to AH? (was: Reasons for AH & ESP )
From: "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@research.att.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 17:24:40 -0400
Cc: ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
Sender: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com

In message <200006022050.QAA17398@solidum.com>, Michael Richardson writes:

>
>  I believe that the decision as to MAY/SHOULD/MUST for IPv6 should be left to
> ipngwg.

No -- they're not security folks, for the most part.  (There are 
certainly exceptions, including Ran Atkinson.)  The decision needs to 
be made jointly, based on headers devised by ipngwg and analyzed for 
security properties by ipsecwg.

		--Steve Bellovin

Follow-Ups:

Re: Death to AH? (was: Reasons for AH & ESP )

From: Michael Richardson <mcr@solidum.com>

Re: Death to AH? (was: Reasons for AH & ESP )

From: Mohan Parthasarathy <mohanp@locked.eng.sun.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Death to AH? (was: Reasons for AH & ESP )
Next by Date: Re: Reasons for AH & ESP
Prev by thread: Re: Interoperability (was: Death to AH?)
Next by thread: Re: Death to AH? (was: Reasons for AH & ESP )
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread