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

Re: Agenda for the Minneapolis meeting



Dan,

I agree that one cannot expect a significant simplification
of IKE without a simplification of ISAKMP.
Yet it may be a good idea to keep two separate documents:
one talking about formats and general functionalities
related to SAs (payloads, message types, create, delete, etc)
and the other describing the core cryptography.

This will help mdularity which in turn should be
good for implementation, for maintaining the standards,
for future extensions and for analysis.

These two aspects could be two parts of the same document,
or they could be separate ones. What is important is that they have (at
least) one editor in common. 

Hugo

PS:If such a separation is adopted make sure that the forner
document (the one talking about formats and general SA maintance
actions) is agnostic about the cryptography, for example
it should not mandate PFS, but leave these decisions to the other
document (responsible for the cryptography itself).





References: