Re: Remaining open issues for RFC-2401bis

[Karen Seo <kseo@bbn.com>]

Mohan,

I'm sorry.  It's my fault that you didn't get a prompt reply.  I 
wrote up something and then got distracted by other tasks.  Reply 
below....


>  > 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.
>
	Well, if we allow this to be any octet string,
	then it presents complications for the user/management
	interface.  So we'd like to limit it to a text string
	containing alphanumeric characters, but not a binary
	string, etc.

Karen