[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Son-of-IKE Performance
> But those details are not nearly as controversial as JFK vs.
> IKEv2 vs.
> SIGMA vs. XKASS, and not even as controversial as the requirements on
> which we'll base that choice. This is, I think, obvious to
> everyone.
> Why are you beating on this point? Is there anyone here, with the
> possible exception of you, who thinks that this is the
> crucial criterion
> on which the WG is going to decide among the different proposals?
It is a little misleading for a protocol which being presented as the
'simple alternative' to omit many of the so-called minor details. I
personally doubt that the crytographic framework will really be the deciding
factor in which protocol advances. It might make the difference between
IKEv2 and SIGMA, but not JFK. JFK is not just a key exchange protocol; it's
a political movement.
Here's a question. Have the authors of JFK given any thought to how (if?)
they will incorporate NAT-traversal? With IKEv2, the already completed
drafts from IKEv1 can be presumably carried forward.
Andrew
-------------------------------------------
There are no rules, only regulations. Luckily,
history has shown that with time, hard work,
and lots of love, anyone can be a technocrat.
Follow-Ups:
References: