[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: CALL FOR DISCUSSION: DHCP over IKE vs Configuration Payload

To: sommerfeld@east.sun.com
Subject: Re: CALL FOR DISCUSSION: DHCP over IKE vs Configuration Payload
From: Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 10:23:35 +0200
cc: Michael Thomas <mat@cisco.com>, Charlie_Kaufman@notesdev.ibm.com, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>, ipsec@lists.tislabs.com, owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
In-reply-to: Your message of Mon, 14 Apr 2003 16:02:59 EDT. <200304142002.h3EK2xwm000983@thunk.east.sun.com>
Sender: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com

 In your previous mail you wrote:

   Indeed.  My sense is that configuration is not an area of expertise
   for the members of this WG, and incorporating DHCP as-is is a better
   solution than trying to reinvent a wheel here.
   
=> I agree: for instance the CP stuff is not the proper solution
for IPv6 and nobody'd like to spend some years to fix it (remember
DHCPv6 :-).

Regards

Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr

References:
- Re: CALL FOR DISCUSSION: DHCP over IKE vs Configuration Payload
  - From: Bill Sommerfeld <sommerfeld@east.sun.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Confirm decision on identity handling.
Next by Date: Re: [rohc] FW: ESP and header compression (ROHC)
Prev by thread: Re: CALL FOR DISCUSSION: DHCP over IKE vs Configuration Payload
Next by thread: Re: CALL FOR DISCUSSION: DHCP over IKE vs Configuration Payload
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread