Re: [IPsec] Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-ipsecme-esp-ah-reqts

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org> Sat, 08 March 2014 11:57 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
X-Original-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 423E11A0265 for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 8 Mar 2014 03:57:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.347
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.347 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id czRN7nwot_TP for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 8 Mar 2014 03:57:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B4A91A0258 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Sat, 8 Mar 2014 03:57:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.207.200.59] ([31.55.55.105]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.8/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s28BvTXl055926 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Sat, 8 Mar 2014 04:57:31 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: hoffman.proper.com: Host [31.55.55.105] claimed to be [10.207.200.59]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\))
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <66A2E597-43D4-4403-9FF8-D8D13F35E958@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 11:57:28 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <C4D60950-132D-46EE-B7FE-DFFA6576565A@vpnc.org>
References: <66A2E597-43D4-4403-9FF8-D8D13F35E958@gmail.com>
To: IPsec ME WG List <ipsec@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipsec/NeDV2fISF6_x6ei-JpDJ9NnqFOM
Subject: Re: [IPsec] Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-ipsecme-esp-ah-reqts
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Sat, 08 Mar 2014 11:57:37 -0000

On Mar 3, 2014, at 3:04 PM, RJ Atkinson <rja.lists@gmail.com> wrote:

>> Perhaps some text along the line of:
>> 
>> 	ESP-NULL offers the same protection as AH, ...
> 
>  This sentence above is not true.  ESP-NULL and AH provide 
> different security properties to the IP-layer.

The next draft has more careful wording about AH and ESP; we'll ask the WG to check it before passing the draft to Kathleen for IETF Last call.

--Paul Hoffman