[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