[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 10 years and no ubiquitous security
RJ Atkinson wrote:
>
> On Saturday, March 16, 2002, at 08:01 , William Allen Simpson wrote:
> >> ... I didn't happen to be at that ad-hoc meeting
> >> in San Diego, so I wasn't influenced by it
> >
> > No, but you were at the meetings where swIPe was demonstrated --
> > ACTUALLY DEMONSTRATED -- and where the the packet headers were
> > discussed.
> >
> We had ESP up and running MUCH MUCH earlier than you seem
> to think.
Ran, you are listed in the proceedings of July 1992 as having attended
the IPSec BOF. Did you have an SP3 implementation at that time? If so,
why didn't you demonstrate it?
> And the swIPe documents describe something with
> visible differences from the ESP that resulted in RFC-1827.
>
The ESP in RFC-1827 has one and only one field:
+-------------+--------------------+------------+---------------------+
| Security Association Identifier (SPI), 32 bits |
+=============+====================+============+=====================+
(A field that *I* named, Security Parameters Index ("SPI"), which *you*
mis-typed, for the record!)
That, amazingly enough, bears no resemblence to what-so-ever to SP3,
but is exactly what was implemented for the version of swIPe that I was
using.
> > And you also acknowledge "the proposed swIPe security protocol"!
> >
> > So, it would seem your message is rather disingenuous.
>
> Your atttempt to rewrite history is noted, but neither appreciated
> nor accurate.
>
You cannot even keep your lies straight when the documents are readily
available on-line.
Your acknowlegments read:
Many of the concepts here are derived from or were influenced by the
US Government's SP3 security protocol specification, the ISO/IEC's
NLSP specification, or from the proposed swIPe security protocol....
Ran, you are a disgrace to the profession.
I refuse to comment further on your posts.
--
William Allen Simpson
Key fingerprint = 17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26 DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32