RE: SOI QUESTIONS: 2.6 Formal proofs of security

["Stephane Beaulieu" <stephane@cisco.com>]

>
>
> Please discuss and answer this question.....
>
> 2.6 Formal proofs of security
>
> 2.6.)  Does SOI need to provide a formal proof of security?  (Is this
> a "must have" or a "nice to have"?  What are we willing to trade-off
> for having a formal proof of security?)

I've never heard of any potential users turning away IKEv1 because it
didin't have a formal proof.  Then again, I don't speak to customers on a
daily basis.

A formal proof would be "nice to have", but not if it means rendering the
protocol unuseable.



>
> Implications from the Scenarios:
>
> [none]