Re: IKEv2 (son-of-ike) draft

Henry Spencer <henry@spsystems.net> Wed, 21 November 2001 17:51 UTC

Received: from lists.tislabs.com (portal.gw.tislabs.com [192.94.214.101]) by above.proper.com (8.11.6/8.11.3) with ESMTP id fALHpW810837; Wed, 21 Nov 2001 09:51:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: by lists.tislabs.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) id LAA16175 Wed, 21 Nov 2001 11:59:00 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 12:07:21 -0500
From: Henry Spencer <henry@spsystems.net>
To: Derek Atkins <warlord@mit.edu>
cc: ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
Subject: Re: IKEv2 (son-of-ike) draft
In-Reply-To: <sjmwv0kcbwg.fsf@benjamin.ihtfp.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.91.1011121120621.12699M-100000@spsystems.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
Sender: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
Precedence: bulk

On 21 Nov 2001, Derek Atkins wrote:
> > So *pick one*.  Just because there are ten different ways of doing it
> > doesn't mean you have to support all ten, or stand there frozen because
> > you're unable to make up your mind.
> 
> Right, and implementation A picks method X, and implementation B picks
> method Y, and implementation C picks method Z, which makes sharing
> keys a huge hastle.

Uh, no, you miss the point -- this discussion is about a new standard,
remember.  A new standard can pick one and say "do it *THAT* way, and
no other".

                                                          Henry Spencer
                                                       henry@spsystems.net