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

RE: IKE must have no Heirs

Actually that is a poor example, there is no built-in protocol dependency
for BGP to use OSPF.  And BGP does use TCP (port 179) for communication vs.
OSPF using a protocol number (89).  IPsec currently has a strong dependency
on IKE.  I do agree that from a network administration and debugging
standpoint it would be nice if both IPsec and IKE shared a common protocol
number.  This would help to simplify firewall configurations, etc.

Mike Horn 

 > -----Original Message-----
 > From: Alex Alten [mailto:Alten@home.com]
 > Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 3:06 AM
 > To: Chris Trobridge
 > Cc: ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
 > Subject: RE: IKE must have no Heirs
 > 
 > 
 > Think about it.  Do you do OSPF over IP and then BGP over UDP?
 > The same applies to IPSEC and key management.
 > 
 > - Alex
 > 
 > At 09:22 AM 8/7/2001 +0100, Chris Trobridge wrote:
 > >
 > >
 > >> -----Original Message-----
 > >> From: Alex Alten [mailto:Alten@home.com]
 > >> Sent: 07 August 2001 08:28
 > >> To: Kory Hamzeh; Hallam-Baker, Phillip
 > >> Cc: 'mcnelson@mindspring.com'; ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
 > >> Subject: Re: IKE must have no Heirs
 > >> 
 > >> 
 > >> 
 > >> I second the motion. And also propose no port number (i.e. 
 > do the new
 > >> one over raw IP).
 > >> 
 > >> - Alex
 > >
 > >What would that achieve? (communicating over raw IP)
 > >
 > >Chris
 > >
 > >
 > >-------------------------------------------------------------
 > --------------
 > --------------------------------------
 > >The information contained in this message is confidential 
 > and is intended 
 > >for the addressee(s) only.  If you have received this 
 > message in error or 
 > >there are any problems please notify the originator 
 > immediately.  The 
 > >unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this 
 > message is 
 > >strictly forbidden. Baltimore Technologies plc will not be liable for
 > direct, 
 > >special, indirect or consequential damages arising from 
 > alteration of the 
 > >contents of this message by a third party or as a result of 
 > any virus being 
 > >passed on.
 > >
 > >In addition, certain Marketing collateral may be added from 
 > time to time to 
 > >promote Baltimore Technologies products, services, Global 
 > e-Security or 
 > >appearance at trade shows and conferences.
 > > 
 > >This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept by 
 > >Baltimore MIMEsweeper for Content Security threats, including
 > >computer viruses.
 > >
 > >
 > --
 > 
 > Alex Alten
 > 
 > Alten@Home.Com
 > 
 >
Follow-Ups: