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

Re: Internet Draft for explicit security labels in IPv6.

To: smb@research.att.com
Subject: Re: Internet Draft for explicit security labels in IPv6.
From: Kais Belgaied <kais@domus.ebay.sun.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 13:37:37 -0800 (PST)
Cc: ipng@sunroof.eng.sun.com, ipsec@lists.tislabs.com, jharwood@vesta-corp.com
Reply-To: Kais Belgaied <kais@domus.ebay.sun.com>
Sender: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com

 >>It mandates a guarantee that the label on the IPv6 is authentic before trustin
 >>g
 >>it. In a link-local scope, where the label is proposed to be carried in the
 >>destination header, ESP is mandatory and sufficient.
 >>On a wider scope, AH is necessary.
 >
 >Or it could be bound to the certificate and recreated at the far end.

It could, with the scalability limitation of implicit labeling.

Kais.

 >>
 >> >
 >> >This sounds like it mandates the use of AH, is that correct?
 >> >
 >> >Best Regards,
 >> >Joseph D. Harwood
 >> >jharwood@vesta-corp.com

Prev by Date: Re: Internet Draft for explicit security labels in IPv6.
Next by Date: Re: Internet Draft for explicit security labels in IPv6.
Prev by thread: Re: Internet Draft for explicit security labels in IPv6.
Next by thread: Re: Internet Draft for explicit security labels in IPv6.
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread