RE: history and why does IKE need a successor

[rcharlet@SonicWALL.com]

Howdy

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Krywaniuk [mailto:andrew.krywaniuk@alcatel.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 7:47 AM
> To: Ricky Charlet; 'list'
> Subject: RE: history and why does IKE need a successor
> 
> 
> Ricky, I can't say I agree with all aspects of your story, 
> but it's as good
> a yarn as any.
> 


Thanks. And why don't I take this opportunity to say to the list that my recollection of history is as guaranteed to be flawed as any single humans and even more so since I am not really a principle in the events.

But historical context drives my question: None of us like the option explosion presently in IKE. Some of us want more new features in any successor to IKE (remote access support). Yet IKE got itself widley deployed with some non-standards track options while we took a multi-year time-out. Why do we need to replace IKE at all? It will cost customers time and effort to deploy. What benefit will it offer?

The historical accounting I did probably only serves as a major distraction from the qeustion at the bottom. But I could not withstand the curiosity of seeing what other peoples perspective was about how we got here.

Please do not construe me as saying that I like the current state of affairs. But it is tolerable. And deployed. (am I harping on that or what?)