Re:

[Mark Baugher <mbaugher@cisco.com>]

I believe that ipsec interoperability is either ah interoperability or esp 
interoperability but that neither ah nor esp are mandated by ipsec.

thanks, Mark
At 02:54 PM 9/4/2003 -0400, owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com wrote:
>(firewall-user@nutshell.tislabs.com [192.94.214.100])
>         by lists.tislabs.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id MAA28208
>         Thu, 4 Sep 2003 12:00:49 -0400 (EDT)
>nutshell.tislabs.com via csmap (V6.0)
>         id srcAAA9UaWJ3; Thu, 4 Sep 03 10:03:44 -0400
>From: "Andrew Wenlang Zhu" <Andrew.Zhu@hp.com>
>To: <ipsec@lists.tislabs.com>
>Subject: AH or ESP protocol support in IKEv1
>Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 18:31:50 -0700
>Message-ID: <006c01c37284$50bf9c10$6f690d0f@AZ735044>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain;
>         charset="iso-8859-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
>In-reply-to: <B459CE1AFFC52D4688B2A5B842CA35EA7A4EFC@corpmx14.us.dg.com>
>Importance: Normal
>Sender: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
>Precedence: bulk
>
>Hello,
>
>I have one question regarding AH and ESP, Which protocol is the MUST be
>supported protocol in IPSec? Or supporting either one can be claimed that
>the implementation is standard compliant(assume other things are same)?
>
>I cannot find a clear statement in RFCs.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Andrew