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

Re: Remove private-use values from IKEv2



On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, Paul Hoffman / VPNC wrote:

> At 3:42 PM -0800 3/14/02, Dan Harkins wrote:
> >How can you do a tunnel discovery protocol *in* a vendor ID payload?
>
> Like Jan said, using the first part as the ID and the rest of the
> payload as a TLV list (or ASN.1 or whatever).
>

Turns out that doesn't cover all the bases, though. I'll see if I can
come up with a way to cover all the other bases as well (Just sent Dan
an email). I don't want to LOOSE functionality in this process (at
least not much). I'm not at all for impairing the ability for people
to experiment.

jan


> >The only reason to try to test interoperability of implementations using
> >private use values is because the thing they are doing with private use
> >values cannot be done in a standard fashion and that thing is important
> >enough that multi-vendor interoperability is important.
> >
> >But if it is that important then why don't we come up with a standard way
> >to do it? Politics is one. Bureaucracy and WG inertia is another (that
> >it takes longer for the WG to decide something than for huge companies
> >to go through two complete product cycles is sad).
> >
> >If a solution to a problem that people are demanding a solution to is
> >either politically forbidden or only likely to to come out in 3-5 years
> >then vendors are going to bypass the process.
> >
> >Taking away private use values because people are misusing them (how to
> >standardize something outside of the standardization process) will only
> >cause the workarounds they devise to be more novel and problematic. We
> >should fix the problem that is causing them to misuse the private use
> >values in the first place.
>
> We completely agree here. Any you have already covered it in Section
> 10.3: new payload numbers are allocated when getting an RFC
> published, not by waiting around for the WG. That is the right way to
> do things, particularly because at some point this WG is supposed to
> shut down.
>
> --Paul Hoffman, Director
> --VPN Consortium
>

 --
Jan Vilhuber                                            vilhuber@cisco.com
Cisco Systems, San Jose                                     (408) 527-0847