Re: [IPsec] WG Adoption call for draft-btw-add-ipsecme-ike

[Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>]

    > This is the start of 2 week WG adoption call for this document, ending
    > 2021-11-22. Please send your reply about whether you support adopting
    > this document as WG document or not.

I have browsed through the document.

I don't know if the mechanism is correct or not.
I think that Paul Wouters' email seems correct to me.

I think that there is an interaction with provisioning domains (PvD) which is
not spelled out.  
The remote access "VPN" is usually a provisioning domain these days.

In general, I don't think that split-DNS is a good thing.
I don't think that sending all traffic through the VPN is a good thing.
Almost everyone that I know, that has any kind of VPN, has more than one
potentially active at the same time. (but my friends are mostly consultants
like me).

So I object to the entire notion that we need to do anything at all: there
are way better solutions than split-dns, and I think we should stop pandering
to enterprises that live in the dark-ages of 1992 IPv4.  Do any of them
actually pay to upgrade/replace their VPN gateway boxes such that they'd actually get
this new code?   Are the split-dns or die enthusiasts running IKEv1 w/3DES+MD5?

Having said this, I do not object to the WG doing this work, but I won't be
taking time to review it.

-- 
Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-