RE: SOI QUESTION: 4.1 Control channel vs. separate protocols

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

> 
> Notes from the chair:
> 
> This question basically introduces the various questions raised by
> section 4 of the soi-features document, which goes to one of the biggest
> differences to the JFK and IKEv2 approach.
> 
> 
> 4. One or two phases
> 
> 4.1 Control channel vs. separate protocols
> 
> 4.1.A) [Meta question, that will be answered by the other questions in
> section 4.]  Does SOI need a control channel for SA management?  Or is
> it acceptable to piggy back SA management as a part of other parts of
> the SOI protocol?

My belief is that a control channel would work best.


> 
> Implications from the Scenarios:
> 
> VPN: <<<This calls out a need for either a two-phased approach for
> SOI, or a single-phased approach that is sufficiently fast, where
> "fast" represents an optimal combination of "number of messages" and
> "computational expenditure".>>> [[[4.1]]]
> 
>