RE: AD requests WG review of final revisions to draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-reqts-06.txt <= 48hrs please

"William Dixon" <ietf-wd@v6security.com> Wed, 25 February 2004 04:12 UTC

Received: from lists.tislabs.com (portal.tislabs.com [192.94.214.101]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA25631 for <ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Feb 2004 23:12:36 -0500 (EST)
Received: by lists.tislabs.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) id RAA14270 Tue, 24 Feb 2004 17:40:42 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <200402242250.i1OMo2NA032424@rs9.luxsci.com>
From: William Dixon <ietf-wd@v6security.com>
To: 'Tero Kivinen' <kivinen@safenet-inc.com>
Cc: Briansw@microsoft.com, vvolpe@cisco.com, Ari.Huttunen@f-secure.com, ldiburro@nortelnetworks.com, ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
Subject: RE: AD requests WG review of final revisions to draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-reqts-06.txt <= 48hrs please
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 14:49:51 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-reply-to: <16443.51136.808898.917913@ryijy.hel.internal>
X-Lux-Comment: LuxSci remailer message ID code - 1077663002-2045697.08661733
Sender: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
Precedence: bulk
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Thanks Tero. Cc'ing the list. Any others have comments on the proposed
changes ?

-----Original Message-----
From: Tero Kivinen [mailto:kivinen@safenet-inc.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 1:53 PM
To: William Dixon
Cc: Briansw@microsoft.com; vvolpe@cisco.com; Ari.Huttunen@F-Secure.com;
ldiburro@nortelnetworks.com
Subject: FW: AD requests WG review of final revisions to
draft-ietf-ipsec-nat-reqts-06.txt <= 48hrs please

William Dixon writes:
> NAT-T authors, please make sure you are ok with these changes in next
24hrs.

I checked the changes out, and they seem to be ok. 

> I noticed also that UDP-ESP-08 currently lacks a statement on how it 
> meets the requirements.

I noticed that when I edited it, but didn't want to add it myself.

> IKE NAT-T has such a statement in the intro. Thanks, -Wm

And that actually states, that the IKE NAT-T in combination with UDP-ENCAPS
represents an "unconditionally compliant" solution to the requirements as
defined by [Aboba03]...
--
kivinen@safenet-inc.com