Re: [IPsec] Some comments / questions on draft-ietf-ipsecme-ad-vpn-problem

[Vishwas Manral <[e-mail]>]

Hi Lou,

I have included the other comments. The last one remaining is:

> VM> I think this is an important requirement. A tunnel should be able to
> > provide an interface by which when tunnel IP parameters change we do not
> > have to change any configuration for higher application like Routing. I
> > had earlier mentioned in more generic terms earlier but changed to the
> > terms provided based on feedback from the list.
>
> What higher level protocols like most routing protocols that use the
> tunnel interface IP addresses in operation?
>
> >
> > The entire idea is the with scale configuration needs to be reduced and
> > that needs to happen across layers, so every layer needs to provide the
> > service. Let me know what it is I am unable to convey.
>
> sure, but I think you're placing new requirements on the routing &
> tunneling protocols.
>
> VM> There are no restrictions on an application protocol like Routing. The
idea is that the lower needs to provide a functionality, so that if
required a higher layer can use it. There is no restriction at all on the
higher layer. Do let me know if that is clearer?

Thanks,
Vishwas