[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Comments on: draft-vlado-ipsec-keep-alive-00.txt
"Scott G. Kelly" wrote:
> > > Hi Vlado,
> > >
> > > I'm not sure if you were aware of it, but there is another Internet-Draft
> > > whose goal it is to provide the same functionality. See
> > > http://www.vpnc.org/draft-ietf-ipsec-heartbeats
> > >
> > > It has received quite a bit of feedback, and I think that most people are
> > > pretty satisfied with it.
>
> This is absolute nonsense. Take a straw poll right now.
>
> <much trimmed after this...>
>
> All in all, I think the rough consensus was that a much simpler
> mechanism would suffice.
>
> Scott
At least I would very happy to see a SIMPLE solution. Vlado's
solution could probably be quite fine. It should drop all mentioning
of phase 2, it's unnecessary since it runs on top of phase 1 SA.
The draft could also throw away the text cut&pasted from ISAKMP RFC,
we've all read it, thank you. Similarly, mentioning a particular
implementation of fail-safe GW, or particular API details could be deleted.
--
Ari Huttunen phone: +358 9 859 900
Senior Software Engineer fax : +358 9 8599 0452
F-Secure Corporation http://www.F-Secure.com
F-Secure products: Integrated Solutions for Enterprise Security
Follow-Ups:
References: