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

Re: NAT traversal documents: are we close to done?

To: ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
Subject: Re: NAT traversal documents: are we close to done?
From: Markus Stenberg <mstenber@ssh.com>
Date: 31 Oct 2001 09:42:51 +0200
In-Reply-To: <p05101015b804d4112718@[165.227.249.20]>
Organization: SSH Communications Security
References: <p05101015b804d4112718@[165.227.249.20]>
Sender: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) XEmacs/21.4 (Academic Rigor)

paul.hoffman@vpnc.org (Paul Hoffman / VPNC) writes:
> Greetings again. The past few weeks have seen new drafts for the two 
> main NAT traversal documents, draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-01.txt 
> (Negotiation of NAT-Traversal in the IKE and 
> draft-ietf-ipsec-udp-encaps-01.txt (UDP Encapsulation of IPsec 
> Packets). Are there any outstanding issues on them? Might we have 
> these finished soon?

I believe they're done (although we noted later on that our Expires: header
in the draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-t-ike-01 looks amusing, but apparently it's not
checked by anyone ;->).

At least, those are all to-do items related to drafts that I know of (the
IKE draft contains few clarifications and udp-encap draft removed AH
support and had some clarifications).

> --Paul Hoffman, Director
> --VPN Consortium

-Markus

References:

NAT traversal documents: are we close to done?

From: Paul Hoffman / VPNC <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>

Prev by Date: RE: CBC makes Implementations too Slow.
Next by Date: RE: CBC makes Implementations too Slow.
Prev by thread: NAT traversal documents: are we close to done?
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread