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

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



At 12:59 PM -0700 4/4/01, Dan Harkins wrote:
>   I think the decision to remove the MUST language for AH from the RFCs
>should not be influenced either by vendors desire to claim compliance--
>they will anyway-- or the business models of the various compliance
>organizations-- they will not test full compliance anyway or they'd go
>out of business.

Fully agree with both reasons. This WG is not in the business of 
making it easier for a vendor to say whether or not it complies with 
a spec; vendors will say that they are even in the face of 
countervailing facts. This WG is not in the business of helping 
organizations that test our specs. This WG is in the business of 
making sensible standards, if that is possible in this space.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium


References: