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

Re: On the Use of SCTP with IPsec



"Angelos D. Keromytis" wrote:
> 
> Steve Kent wrote:
>  >I've made similar suggestions earlier, i.e., we have an inconsistent
>  >set of options for expressing selector values. Originally 2401
>  >allowed individual values, ranges, and enumerated lists for all
>  >selectors. It was late in the process when we discovered that IKE
>  >didn't allow all of these, and was uneven in what it supported for
>  >different selector fields.  I'd recommend that IKE be enhanced to
>  >support those three means of specification of values for all 5
>  >selectors.
> 
> I agree with this, but I'll point out that it's outside the scope of
> the SCTP/IPsec draft.
> 

I agree with both of you, and think this underscores the point that this
feature is useful in general. Can we get it added to son-of-ike?

Scott


References: