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

Re: AH length field, and derivation of name "SKEYID"

To: Markku Savela <msa@burp.tkv.asdf.org>
Subject: Re: AH length field, and derivation of name "SKEYID"
From: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <itojun@iijlab.net>
Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2001 19:00:05 +0900
Cc: Radia.Perlman@sun.com, ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
In-reply-to: msa's message of Mon, 02 Jul 2001 08:45:50 +0300. <200107020545.IAA01910@burp.tkv.asdf.org>
Sender: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com

>> Given that AH is an IPv6 extension header, why is its length
>> specified in different units than other IPv6 extension headers?
>> Unless I'm confused, AH's length field is in units of 32-bit chunks
>> where IPv6 extension headers length field is in units of 64-bit
>> chunks.

	yes, the above is correct.
	AH: length in bytes = (length field + 2) << 2
	others: length in bytes = (length field + 1) << 3

	the above interpretation fits all of the implementation we have
	interoperated with in the past.

itojun

References:

Re: AH length field, and derivation of name "SKEYID"

From: Markku Savela <msa@burp.tkv.asdf.org>

Prev by Date: Re: AH length field, and derivation of name "SKEYID"
Next by Date: Is Anyone in the IPsec WG Writing a Draft RFC Using AES CBC MAC for ESP Integrity?
Prev by thread: Re: AH length field, and derivation of name "SKEYID"
Next by thread: Re: AH length field, and derivation of name "SKEYID"
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread