[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Please save the pre-shared key mode
Paul Koning writes:
> >>>>> "Wang," == Wang, Cliff <CWang@smartpipes.com> writes:
>
> Wang,> Very simple reasons, IKEv1 is going to be replaced by IKEv2 in
> Wang,> the future and KINK has yet to be standardized and it is not
> Wang,> going to replace IKE. On the other hand, adding PSK support in
> Wang,> IKEv2 is not an overkill, but provides much more flexibilities
> Wang,> and more choices for service providers.
>
> Agreed.
>
> It makes no sense to call a protocol XYZv2 if you're removing from it
> one of the very widely used features of XYZv1.
>
> If you want a protocol without preshared keys, feel free, but then
> don't call it IKE and don't expect people to give up IKEv1.
The name of protocol is irrelevant at this
point. What is of primary importance is the
requirements. "IKE" qua IKE is not one of the
requirements. What to name that protocol can
be decided after it is chosen, especially if
people think it's misleading.
Mike
Follow-Ups:
References: