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

Re: [Design] Re: Wes Hardaker: opportunistic encryption deploymentproblems

To: Bill Manning <bmanning@ISI.EDU>
Subject: Re: [Design] Re: Wes Hardaker: opportunistic encryption deploymentproblems
From: "D. Hugh Redelmeier" <hugh@mimosa.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 14:26:18 -0400 (EDT)
cc: Henry Spencer <henry@spsystems.net>, Hugh Daniel <hugh@road.xisp.net>, <ipsec@lists.tislabs.com>, FreeS/WAN Design Issues <design@lists.freeswan.org>
In-Reply-To: <200108080913.f789DNM20119@zed.isi.edu>
Reply-To: <hugh@mimosa.com>
Sender: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com

| From: Bill Manning <bmanning@ISI.EDU>

| % We chose TXT because we simply wanted to convey a gateway address and a
| % key, and we wanted to parse it with 10 lines of code, not 10,000.
|
| 	$DEITY help you when you grab a random TXT record... :)

Why would you have random TXT records in your reverse domain,
especially ones starting with "X-IPsec-Gateway("?

Hugh Redelmeier
hugh@mimosa.com  voice: +1 416 482-8253

Follow-Ups:

Re: [Design] Re: Wes Hardaker: opportunistic encryption deployment

From: Bill Manning <bmanning@ISI.EDU>

References:

Re: Wes Hardaker: opportunistic encryption deployment problems

From: Bill Manning <bmanning@ISI.EDU>

Prev by Date: RE: Litterature for SIP and security
Next by Date: RE: Notify SPI field specifications
Prev by thread: Re: [Design] Re: Wes Hardaker: opportunistic encryption deployment problems
Next by thread: Re: [Design] Re: Wes Hardaker: opportunistic encryption deployment
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread