[IPsec] Roadmap doc comment: IPsec performance testing
Yaron Sheffer <yaronf@checkpoint.com> Tue, 07 April 2009 06:31 UTC
Return-Path: <yaronf@checkpoint.com>
X-Original-To: ipsec@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 644E13A67F5 for <ipsec@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Apr 2009 23:31:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.663
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.663 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.065, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KuDiiE9rSp1H for <ipsec@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Apr 2009 23:31:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dlpdemo.checkpoint.com (dlpdemo.checkpoint.com [194.29.32.54]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 953883A6359 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Apr 2009 23:31:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by dlpdemo.checkpoint.com (Postfix, from userid 105) id 770EB30C001; Tue, 7 Apr 2009 09:32:29 +0300 (IDT)
Received: from michael.checkpoint.com (michael.checkpoint.com [194.29.32.68]) by dlpdemo.checkpoint.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35DAC2CC001 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Apr 2009 09:32:29 +0300 (IDT)
X-CheckPoint: {49DAF0C3-0-14201DC2-1FFFF}
Received: from il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by michael.checkpoint.com (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.10) with ESMTP id n376WSqO024874 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Apr 2009 09:32:28 +0300 (IDT)
Received: from il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.com ([194.29.32.26]) by il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.com ([194.29.32.26]) with mapi; Tue, 7 Apr 2009 09:32:28 +0300
From: Yaron Sheffer <yaronf@checkpoint.com>
To: IPsecme WG <ipsec@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2009 09:32:24 +0300
Thread-Topic: Roadmap doc comment: IPsec performance testing
Thread-Index: Acm3SpzAgpdnsro5QxCIv9Q1xam58w==
Message-ID: <7F9A6D26EB51614FBF9F81C0DA4CFEC8D9A7DBEC37@il-ex01.ad.checkpoint.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; micalg="SHA1"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_005D_01C9B763.C21940D0"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [IPsec] Roadmap doc comment: IPsec performance testing
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Tue, 07 Apr 2009 06:31:25 -0000
Hi Sheila, Suresh, This issue may have been raised before, but I think the two bmwg documents on IPsec performance testing do belong in the Roadmap doc: http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-bmwg-ipsec-meth-04.txt http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-bmwg-ipsec-term-11.txt They have just been resubmitted to BMWG, and seem finally on their way to be published. Thanks, Yaron
- [IPsec] Roadmap doc comment: IPsec performance te… Yaron Sheffer