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

Re: IKE attributes consistency.

To: shacham@shacham.net, silvere@iki.fi
Subject: Re: IKE attributes consistency.
From: "Sami Vaarala" <svaarala@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 09:11:07 +0200
Cc: kivinen@ssh.fi, sakane@ydc.co.jp, ipsec@lists.tislabs.com, bobmonsour@home.com, royp@cisco.com, matt@3am-software.com, ippcp@external.cisco.com
Reply-To: silvere@iki.fi
Sender: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com

>If one of the transforms, say IPComp,  may elect
>not to include the d-h group attribute, how does your
>suggestion differ from the discussed statement of
>rfc2393bis?

rfc2393bis guidelines are one specific instance of my suggestion,
but it covers more than that.  I think the qm d-h attribute handling
is a design flaw and the suggestion is a liberal way of dealing with
it in a practical implementation.

It's too bad there is no attribute list that applies to the SA
payload as a whole...

Sami
--
Sami Vaarala         /  Pygmy Projects - We make it small!
www.iki.fi/~silvere /
silvere@iki.fi     /  No matter where you go, there you are.

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Prev by Date: Placement of IPSec...
Next by Date: Re: Placement of IPSec...
Prev by thread: Re: IKE attributes consistency.
Next by thread: ISAKMP control messages
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread