Re: CONSENSUS TEST: Fragmentation handling

[Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>]

At 1:06 PM +0300 4/7/04, Tero Kivinen wrote:
>Stephen Kent writes:
>>  >   I'm unclear how a responder knows that a non-initial fragment SA is
>>  >being negotiated in IKE. Is it based only on the OPAQUE value as
>>  >port-selectors? What about the protocol?
>>
>>  The use of OPAQUE is now restricted to carriage of non-initial
>>  fragments, after the change that Mark suggested. so, yes, negotiating
>>  an SA with port fields set to OPAQUE indicates that the SA is used to
>>  carry non-initial fragments. for IPv4, this is irrespective of the
>>  port field selector, which could be specific, or ANY.  for v6, it is
>   ^^^^^^^^^^
>
>I assume this should be "protocol field selector", not "port"

whoops. yes, I meant protocol, not port.


I like your suggestion of NON_FIRST_FRAGMENTS_ALSO as a notification.

Steve