IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [IPsec] Informal poll on IKEv2 { over TCP | fragmentation }

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Thu, 14 March 2013 13:20 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
X-Original-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41CBD21F8FE5 for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 06:20:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id V1l9ykXw-zAo for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 06:20:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [193.110.157.68]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 732A621F8F53 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 06:20:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ZRVsN4hhwz3dc; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 09:20:24 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UK0MRE1CNMFb; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 09:20:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (206-248-139-105.dsl.teksavvy.com [206.248.139.105]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 09:20:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 500) id 2172E8085F; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 09:20:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12089804F3; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 09:20:23 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 09:20:23 -0400
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Yoav Nir <ynir@checkpoint.com>
In-Reply-To: <FEC3BAEA-EF5D-4344-AC09-CD13651103AF@checkpoint.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.03.1303140918090.17863@nohats.ca>
References: <20799.34490.611737.922474@fireball.kivinen.iki.fi> <AF3F21AE-8695-47FC-BC41-4097635D0C95@vpnc.org> <FEC3BAEA-EF5D-4344-AC09-CD13651103AF@checkpoint.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.03 (LFD 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Cc: IPsecme WG <ipsec@ietf.org>, Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Subject: Re: [IPsec] Informal poll on IKEv2 { over TCP | fragmentation }
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 13:20:29 -0000

On Thu, 14 Mar 2013, Yoav Nir wrote:

> "I would prefer the WG to stop working on IKEv2 over TCP and instead work on standardizing IKEv2 fragmentation"

+1

> However, I would prefer that we clear up the situation with Microsoft's IPR before making such a change to our charter.

Less worried about the IPR claim.

Paul

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email