Re: [I2nsf] [Last-Call] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-i2nsf-sdn-ipsec-flow-protection-11.txt

[tom petch <[e-mail]>]

Rafa

Another separate thought.  The references you have for algorithms are to 
both IANA and RFC.  It seems to me that the IANA pages will be more 
up-to-date and can be updated by Expert Review which may take place 
before there is an RFC available while the RFC provide more detail that 
a user might want.  I am uncertain which is best so I raised this on the 
ipsecme WG list, which is responsible for IKEv2 maintenance, and I got 
the following.  The question is mine, the response from Tero Kivinen.

============================================================

 > So, question.  What references should draft i2nsf-sdn point readers to
 > for up-to-date information on algorithms (assuming that they do not
 > track the IETF WG that updates information on IKEv2 ie like me)?

It should use IANA registry for the mapping between numbers,
algorithms and references; and then for algoritm implementation
requirements and usage guidance it should point to RFC8247 for IKEv2,
and to RFC8221 for ESP.

 > Currently that is both a reference to the IANA registry and to an RFC;
 > is that your best advice?

Yes.
=============================================================

So do as you are currently doing and I shall stop thinking about it.

Tom Petch


On 28/10/2020 10:42, Rafa Marin-Lopez wrote:
> Hi Tom:


<snip>