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

Re: SA identification

To: "Angelos D. Keromytis" <angelos@keromytis.org>
Subject: Re: SA identification
From: Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 13:58:44 -0500
Cc: ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
In-Reply-To: <200103231845.f2NIj8l26371@nyarlathotep.keromytis.org>
References: <200103231845.f2NIj8l26371@nyarlathotep.keromytis.org>
Sender: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com

At 1:45 PM -0500 3/23/01, Angelos D. Keromytis wrote:
>In message <p0501040ab6e11a269018@[128.33.4.39]>, Stephen Kent writes:
>>At 9:15 PM +0200 3/22/01, Markku Savela wrote:
>>
>>As the SCTP presentation and ID shows, it is not purely a local
>>matter. If we did away with the requirement to use the destination
>>address as part of the SA selection process at a receiver, there
>>would be no need to make this process more complex to accommodate
>>SCTP requirements.
>
>That's correct for the receiver; the sender still has to be able to
>use the destination address as part of the SA lookup, and thus has to be
>able to do a many-to-one mapping based on the address.
>-Angelos

No argument there!

Steve

References:

Re: SA identification

From: "Angelos D. Keromytis" <angelos@keromytis.org>

Prev by Date: Re: SA identification
Next by Date: Re: SA identification
Prev by thread: Re: SA identification
Next by thread: Re: SA identification
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread