[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: