IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IPsec] Fwd: Gen-art review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2bis-08.txt

Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com> Fri, 19 March 2010 19:02 UTC

Return-Path: <narten@us.ibm.com>
X-Original-To: ipsec@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA72C3A6929 for <ipsec@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:02:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.469
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.469 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS=1.13]
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 LJsP0ozXohDO for <ipsec@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:02:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from e39.co.us.ibm.com (e39.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.160]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCE153A68C6 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:02:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from d03relay03.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay03.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.228]) by e39.co.us.ibm.com (8.14.3/8.13.1) with ESMTP id o2JIsaFT007799 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:54:36 -0600
Received: from d03av06.boulder.ibm.com (d03av06.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.245]) by d03relay03.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id o2JJ2SKg038954 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 13:02:29 -0600
Received: from d03av06.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av06.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.3/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id o2JJ4vP6015352 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 13:04:57 -0600
Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (sig-9-76-142-160.mts.ibm.com [9.76.142.160]) by d03av06.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.3/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id o2JJ4udm015308 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 19 Mar 2010 13:04:57 -0600
Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (8.14.3/8.12.5) with ESMTP id o2JJ2Qig025943; Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:02:26 -0400
Message-Id: <201003191902.o2JJ2Qig025943@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
In-reply-to: <p06240877c7c955d437e0@[10.20.30.158]>
References: <p06240877c7c955d437e0@[10.20.30.158]>
Comments: In-reply-to Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> message dated "Fri, 19 Mar 2010 09:27:01 -0700."
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:02:26 -0400
From: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>
Cc: IPsecme WG <ipsec@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [IPsec] Fwd: Gen-art review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-ikev2bis-08.txt
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipsec>
List-Post: <mailto:ipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 19:02:27 -0000

>  s3.3.4: The draft states that the list of mandatory to implement
>   suites has been removed due to evolution going too fast.  Is this
>   acceptable?

Put the list in a standalone document that can (in theory) be easily
updated without tying it to other changes in IKEv2?

Thomas

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email