RE: IKE lifetime seconds
"Andrew Krywaniuk" <andrew.krywaniuk@alcatel.com> Wed, 17 April 2002 22:47 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 g3HMlWm07201; Wed, 17 Apr 2002 15:47:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by lists.tislabs.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) id SAA20306 Wed, 17 Apr 2002 18:01:49 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 18:04:54 -0400
Message-ID: <000701c1e65b$e896e4a0$1e72788a@ca.alcatel.com>
From: Andrew Krywaniuk <andrew.krywaniuk@alcatel.com>
Reply-To: andrew.krywaniuk@alcatel.com
To: 'James Comen' <jcomen@torrentnet.com>, <ipsec@lists.tislabs.com>
Subject: RE: IKE lifetime seconds
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0008_01C1E63A.618544A0"
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <3CBDD917.834B01DE@torrentnet.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Sender: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
Precedence: bulk
Some implementations will automatically rekey the IKE SA and some won't. This issue was never resolved in the RFCs, and it became known as the "continuous channel mode" vs. "dangling sa" debate. The failure to standardize this issue has led to a myriad of interopability bugs. There is some indication that the issue will be resolved in favour of continuous channel mode. This is the recommendation of draft-spencer and it was also proposed in draft-jenkins (an expired draft on rekeying). Also, IKEv2 mandates continuous channel mode. Andrew ------------------------------------------- There are no rules, only regulations. Luckily, history has shown that with time, hard work, and lots of love, anyone can be a technocrat. -----Original Message----- From: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com [mailto:owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com]On Behalf Of James Comen Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 4:21 PM To: ipsec@lists.tislabs.com Subject: IKE lifetime seconds When the ike protection suite lifetime is reached (either in time or kb), the IKE sa is deleted. I've seen nothing that suggests that it should be automatically renegotiated like an ipsec SA. I'm assuming that the IKE sa must be negotiated again via the receipt of a packet which requires ipsec protection. Is this correct, that there should be no automatic renegotiation of the IKE sa? Thanks Jim -- Jim Comen jcomen@torrentnet.com Ericsson IP Infrastructure Voice (919) 472 - 9932 920 Main Campus Drive, Suite 544 Fax (919) 472 - 9999 Raleigh, NC 27606
- IKE lifetime seconds James Comen
- RE: IKE lifetime seconds Andrew Krywaniuk