Re: Two issues: AH death, and SA identification

[Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>]

At 10:43 PM +0200 3/23/01, Markku Savela wrote:
>  > Let's get a new protocol number, call it something like SESP (SPI-only
>>  ESP), and use that as the protocol that only uses the SPI as a
>>  selector.  This way we don't have to touch AH or ESP, and most of the
>>  code can be shared between ESP and SESP.
>
>Why would you need a new protocol number if you changed this? "On the
>wire" format for IPSEC AH and ESP packets would not change at all. [or
>did I miss some sarcasm in the proposal?]

The protocol is more than the format of bits on the wire; it also 
encompasses the processing at seder and receiver. So, if these 
changes affect that processing, it's not the same protocol.

Steve

---

Follow-Ups:

• Re: Two issues: AH death, and SA identification
• From: Markku Savela <msa@burp.tkv.asdf.org>

References:

• Two issues: AH death, and SA identification
• From: ji@research.att.com
• Re: Two issues: AH death, and SA identification
• From: Markku Savela <msa@burp.tkv.asdf.org>

---

• Prev by Date: Re: Death to AH (was Re: SA identification)
• Next by Date: Re: Death to AH (was Re: SA identification)
• Prev by thread: Re: Two issues: AH death, and SA identification
• Next by thread: Re: Two issues: AH death, and SA identification
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread