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

Re: Remaining open issues for RFC-2401bis



 > 4.  selector name clarification (issue #93)
> 
>         Seems straightforward, and there has been no disagreement on the
>         mailing list.  If any disagree with the text suggested by Karen
>         on February 25th, please make your conerns known by the end of
>         the week.
> 
I asked for a clarification for which i got no response. For one of the cases,

d. a user's name in a local system context
   (this corresponds to ID_KEY_ID in IKEv2)

ID_KEY_ID carries opque octet stream. So, why limit this to user's name ?
It looks like RFC 2401 supported OPAQUE values but i could be reading
it wrongly.

-mohan