Re: revised IPsec processing model

[Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <itojun@iijlab.net>]

>Thanks for the additional info. As Bill & Markus pointed out, the VID 
>is not the same as an address, in the sense discussed above. It is an 
>identifier largely internal to IPsec. Does Bill's suggestion of how 
>to accommodate the VID address your concerns?

	i see, i guess we need to find some term other than "virtual interface".

	my another concern is that the text talks too much about implementation
	details - for instance, SPD cache implementation could vary by
	implementation to implementation.  with our implementation we cache
	SPD on connected tcp/udp control block (inpcb).
	maybe put less (but sufficient) text in 2401bis, and add VID and caching
	details as appendix?

itojun