Re: [Ipsec] Minor comment on draft-ietf-ipsec-rfc2402bis-10.txt (AH)
Markku Savela <msa@burp.tkv.asdf.org> Wed, 16 February 2005 15:57 UTC
Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA02531 for <ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Feb 2005 10:57:29 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1D1Qw8-0002Y1-CY; Wed, 16 Feb 2005 10:17:56 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1D1QhV-0006Hr-Cr for ipsec@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 16 Feb 2005 10:02:49 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA18076 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Feb 2005 10:02:47 -0500 (EST)
Received: from burp.tkv.asdf.org ([212.16.99.49] ident=root) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1D1R2l-0006al-0J for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 16 Feb 2005 10:24:48 -0500
Received: from burp.tkv.asdf.org (msa@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by burp.tkv.asdf.org (8.13.2/8.13.2/Debian-1) with ESMTP id j1GF2kvw018235 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Feb 2005 17:02:46 +0200
Received: (from msa@localhost) by burp.tkv.asdf.org (8.13.2/8.13.2/Submit) id j1GF2kIM018232; Wed, 16 Feb 2005 17:02:46 +0200
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2005 17:02:46 +0200
Message-Id: <200502161502.j1GF2kIM018232@burp.tkv.asdf.org>
From: Markku Savela <msa@burp.tkv.asdf.org>
To: ipsec@ietf.org
In-reply-to: <200502161443.j1GEhG0P017445@burp.tkv.asdf.org> (message from Markku Savela on Wed, 16 Feb 2005 16:43:16 +0200)
Subject: Re: [Ipsec] Minor comment on draft-ietf-ipsec-rfc2402bis-10.txt (AH)
References: <200502161443.j1GEhG0P017445@burp.tkv.asdf.org>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: d6b246023072368de71562c0ab503126
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IP Security <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org
[Ok, I have to revice my comment a bit...] > There is no such thing as "unrecognized extension header". There are > only "recognized extension headers" and "transport protocol". Above is true, but in connection with AH, the draft sentences are sort of correct, perhaps the following was intended: Assume send is using extension header "EX" that receiver does not recognize, and builds an IP packet as follows: IP EX AH ... The receiver does not recognize EX as extension header, and treats it as some transport protocol. As the draft says, AH processing is never called. However, IPsec does get to see this packet as transport EX packet (of course, the two nodes really won't communicate correctly...) _______________________________________________ Ipsec mailing list Ipsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
- [Ipsec] Minor comment on draft-ietf-ipsec-rfc2402… Markku Savela
- Re: [Ipsec] Minor comment on draft-ietf-ipsec-rfc… Markku Savela