IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IPsec] Avoiding Authentication Header (AH)

Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca> Wed, 04 January 2012 14:16 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE8CD21F8718 for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Jan 2012 06:16:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.351
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.351 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.603, BAYES_00=-2.599, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EDtsr-zQ+MGK for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Jan 2012 06:16:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [67.23.6.41]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20D0021F86D1 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Jan 2012 06:16:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from marajade.sandelman.ca (unknown [132.213.238.4]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A4CC34465; Wed, 4 Jan 2012 09:14:09 -0500 (EST)
Received: by marajade.sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 4C68C98147; Wed, 4 Jan 2012 09:16:02 -0500 (EST)
Received: from marajade.sandelman.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by marajade.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4882C9812A; Wed, 4 Jan 2012 09:16:02 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca>
To: "Bhatia, Manav (Manav)" <manav.bhatia@alcatel-lucent.com>
In-Reply-To: <7C362EEF9C7896468B36C9B79200D8350D028A2953@INBANSXCHMBSA1.in.alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <7C362EEF9C7896468B36C9B79200D8350D028A2953@INBANSXCHMBSA1.in.alcatel-lucent.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.3; nmh 1.3-dev; XEmacs 21.4 (patch 22)
Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2012 09:16:02 -0500
Message-ID: <6442.1325686562@marajade.sandelman.ca>
Sender: mcr@sandelman.ca
Cc: "ipsec@ietf.org" <ipsec@ietf.org>, Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
Subject: Re: [IPsec] Avoiding Authentication Header (AH)
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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, 04 Jan 2012 14:16:06 -0000

>>>>> "Manav" == Manav Bhatia <Bhatia> writes:
    Manav> Hi Nico,
 
    >> Advising (and updating said advice as circumstances change)
    >> use-IPsec protocol designers as to when to use ESP and/or AH is
    >> something we should do.  Deprecating AH seems like a nice idea,
    >> but if there's good reasons to still use it, then maybe not.

    Manav> We're not talking about deprecating or killing AH. I concede
    Manav> that I did allude to it in my first draft, but then changed
    Manav> the tone based on the WG feedback, to say that we should
    Manav> "avoid" AH wherever possible.

This is the status quo already.
Why do we need this draft?

-- 
]       He who is tired of Weird Al is tired of life!           |  firewalls  [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON    |net architect[
] mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[
   Kyoto Plus: watch the video <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzx1ycLXQSE>
	               then sign the petition.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email