Re: [IPsec] Avoiding Authentication Header (AH)

[RJ Atkinson <[e-mail]>]

Earlier, Dan Harkins wrote, in part:
> Honestly, if a WG is not paying attention to RFC 4301,
> then what makes you think they're gonna pay attention 
> to a random individual submission ?
> 
> I don't have any particular love for AH but this effort 
> is really lacking in one thing: a problem to solve. 
> 
> On the one hand, we're being told that the effort is 
> necessary because WGs developing a "standard for protocol foo" 
> need to be instructed on how to obtain integrity protection,
> but we're also being told that discouraging AH is OK 
> because no one (in NANOG) is using it and it's a MAY anyway. 
> 
> These seem to be somewhat contradictory to me --
> either no one's using it and we have a solution 
>        in search of a problem;
> or, someone's using it and it would probably be a problem
>     to restrict its use in the future.

+1