Return-Path: X-Original-To: hipsec@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: hipsec@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0918E3A6B89 for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2010 08:42:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.392 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.392 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.207, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8s4FqIXcJYmf for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2010 08:42:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slb-smtpout-01.boeing.com (slb-smtpout-01.boeing.com [130.76.64.48]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73E0A28C226 for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2010 08:37:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (blv-av-01.boeing.com [130.247.48.231]) by slb-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/8.14.4/SMTPOUT) with ESMTP id o3RFanlA002995 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 27 Apr 2010 08:36:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/DOWNSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o3RFanQg018211; Tue, 27 Apr 2010 08:36:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from XCH-NWHT-10.nw.nos.boeing.com (xch-nwht-10.nw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.25.113]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/UPSTREAM_RELAY) with ESMTP id o3RFan2p018205 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=OK); Tue, 27 Apr 2010 08:36:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from XCH-NW-12V.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.25.248]) by XCH-NWHT-10.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.25.113]) with mapi; Tue, 27 Apr 2010 08:36:49 -0700 From: "Ahrenholz, Jeffrey M" To: "'Robert Moskowitz'" Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 08:36:48 -0700 Thread-Topic: OOPS!!! Re: [Hipsec] ENCRYPTED parameter when HIP_Transform is Duomode Thread-Index: AcrmGO1/vyRmHItxSGSm0jfoNPC7FAAAjW/g Message-ID: References: <4BD6EB97.8080106@htt-consult.com> <4BD6F988.2040508@htt-consult.com> In-Reply-To: <4BD6F988.2040508@htt-consult.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "hipsec@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [Hipsec] OOPS!!! Re: ENCRYPTED parameter when HIP_Transform is Duomode X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 15:42:08 -0000 > Duo modes are not needed for HIP_TRANSFORM, but are of value for=20 > ESP_TRANSFORM. >=20 > Values are only defined for HIP_TRANSFORM, ASSUMING that what=20 > works for=20 > one works for the other. This is no longer the case, so do we define=20 > the CCM and GCM transforms in 5202-bis? And for the HIP=20 > Suites, we need=20 > to define which ESP_TRANSFORM to which suite also in 5202-bis? Yes it seems like 5202-bis now requires its own list of suite IDs (includin= g CCM and GCM) instead of just referring to 5201. Will the limit of 6 suite IDs in the ESP_TRANSFORM be enough? > thanks for setting me straight there Jeff, I have been=20 > staring at 5201 for too long... np, you're doing good work :) -Jeff=