Re: Son of IKE: A proposal for moving forward

[Jan Vilhuber <vilhuber@cisco.com>]

Cheryl tried to put together a requirements/scenario document. You can
find it here.

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipsec-sonofike-rqts-00.txt

It tries to list all scenarios we could think of. Some of the are
mutually exclusive, but there for completeness. Feel free to provide
feedback and comments on any scenarios there or add some if we missed
any.

jan


On 12 Jun 2002, Joshua D. Guttman wrote:

> Michael Thomas <mat@cisco.com> writes:
>
> >
> >   You get a self-fulfilling prophecy if your idea of
> >   "practical applicability" == "VPN". Which is
> >   exactly my point. Nobody's even considering any of
> >   the other intended applicability of IPsec when
> >   making decisions about how large the keying
> >   kitchen sink needs to be.
>
> I think it would be useful (certainly to me, but probably to others as
> well) to have a few quick descriptions of the other scenarios you've
> got in mind.  That would help me understand what protocol features
> would count for the broader notion of "practical applicability".
>
> Or if several have already been described somewhere, then a pointer
> would do the trick.
>
> Thanks --
>
>         Joshua
> --
> 	Joshua D. Guttman		<guttman@mitre.org>
> 	MITRE, Mail Stop S119		Office:	+1 781 271 2654
> 	202 Burlington Rd.		Cell:	+1 781 526 5713
> 	Bedford, MA 01730-1420 USA	Fax:	+1 781 271 8953
>
>

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

http://www.eff.org/cafe