[IPsec] ADVPN Use Cases & proposals
Brian Weis <bew@cisco.com> Wed, 11 December 2013 18:45 UTC
Return-Path: <bew@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E149B1AE109 for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 10:45:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.502
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wCOkCLdd4xWC for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 10:45:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mtv-iport-3.cisco.com (mtv-iport-3.cisco.com [173.36.130.14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F6AF1AE121 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 10:45:19 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=771; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1386787514; x=1387997114; h=from:content-transfer-encoding:subject:message-id:date: to:mime-version; bh=XHdDUqIdzr8+HX02cNZFStSEFHIaqmP+ZqqEzQtgFCo=; b=hANE3fsnYSbFQB5M6PupolvyUo2YhdAiLExqPw2Q6F039fGnLIw3zGSi WmOHdEr+N0WKo7Anne9cDGohjSHNfocN5tO4ZIK/k7GkJg8dvnKz+lVo6 20uQKzrrL0MhErCaFGjFThgt4uyo+aR6PuPoFjGbodNAQVKFnXzj1mnnD E=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgcFAP2xqFKrRDoG/2dsb2JhbABZgwe7QRZ0gmaBfYgUAaNAnnUXkjCBEwSJQo5SkhODSg
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,873,1378857600"; d="scan'208";a="97644401"
Received: from mtv-core-1.cisco.com ([171.68.58.6]) by mtv-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 11 Dec 2013 18:45:13 +0000
Received: from dhcp-128-107-147-18.cisco.com (dhcp-128-107-147-18.cisco.com [128.107.147.18]) by mtv-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id rBBIj5eU001203 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 18:45:12 GMT
From: Brian Weis <bew@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <8E5210F4-FA57-420E-92B4-5EF40F2B8D39@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 10:45:05 -0800
To: IPsecme WG <ipsec@ietf.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\))
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510)
Subject: [IPsec] ADVPN Use Cases & proposals
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 18:45:21 -0000
The ADVPN proposals currently state how they believe they meet the requirements of RFC 7018, but not how well they match each of the actual use cases. The minutes of the Vancouver meeting record that Steve Hanna suggested "it might be helpful to have each of proposal teams describe in more detail how their proposal would address the 3 use cases". There was some agreement (including from Sean) that this would be valuable information for the protocol starting point selection process. Yaron & Paul, do you agree and if so can you give the authors some guidance on what you think would be most useful? E.g., have each proposal document how RFC7018's three use cases meet the 16+ RFC7108 requirements, or something else? Thanks, Brian
- [IPsec] ADVPN Use Cases & proposals Brian Weis
- Re: [IPsec] ADVPN Use Cases & proposals Paul Hoffman
- Re: [IPsec] ADVPN Use Cases & proposals Michael Richardson