Re: Son of IKE: A proposal for moving forward

[Uri Blumenthal <uri@bell-labs.com>]

On Wednesday 12 June 2002 12:43, Michael Thomas wrote:
> ......The slant of this working group is very
> VPN-centric, much to the burden of things which
> aren't especially interested in remote access,
> amortization of authentication expense, etc, etc.

I'd rather say - the slant of this WG is towards the practical
industry-applicable, in other words usable in the field stuff,
for the *common* applications (such as VPN, remote access,
etc. etc).

> While this doesn't directly speak to favoring JFK
> or IKEv2, the design decisions of JFK are much
> more favorable to producing a streamlined key
> management protocol.

My personal first priority is usability+practicality,
streamlined-ness - only the second (that dies if
contradicts the first one).

> What is completely lost here is those implementations
> which *don't* need the added functionality and
> *don't* want the added cost............

Most of the *practical* implementations need most of the features
that IKEv2 offers. [those features are there *for a reason*.]


Maybe another protocol should be designed - an extremely streamlined
almost-no-features protocol to satisfy your application needs? [I for 
one won't implement it, but if market shares your need, there will
be room for it.]
-- 
Regards,
Uri-David
-=-=-<>-=-=-
<Disclaimer>