Re: Death to AH (was Re: SA identification)

[Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr>]

 In your previous mail you wrote:

   When there was discussion about why AH at all, the only real reason that
   I can recollect was that Mobile-IPv6 uses it to protect Binding Updates.
   Well, guess what, AH doesn't really work for them either, as witnessed
   in the WG meeting today.
   
=> Is this opinion "IPsec is for VPN only" the opinion of the majority
of the IPsec WG? I know this yours, Jeff's and Henry's too...
And of course the current market is at 99% in VPNs.

Thanks

Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr

---

Follow-Ups:

• Re: Death to AH (was Re: SA identification)
• From: Henry Spencer <henry@spsystems.net>
• Re: Death to AH (was Re: SA identification)
• From: Michael Thomas <mat@cisco.com>

References:

• Death to AH (was Re: SA identification)
• From: Ari Huttunen <Ari.Huttunen@F-Secure.com>

---

• Prev by Date: Re: Death to AH Now
• Next by Date: Re: Death to AH (was Re: SA identification)
• Prev by thread: Death to AH (was Re: SA identification)
• Next by thread: Re: Death to AH (was Re: SA identification)
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread