IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Please save the pre-shared key mode

Ricky Charlet <rcharlet@redcreek.com> Sat, 08 December 2001 00:56 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 fB80uo226140; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:56:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: by lists.tislabs.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) id TAA06882 Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:18:39 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <3C115F4B.803A3327@redcreek.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 16:31:07 -0800
From: Ricky Charlet <rcharlet@redcreek.com>
Organization: Redcreek Communications
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.2-2 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jan Vilhuber <vilhuber@cisco.com>
CC: ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
Subject: Re: Please save the pre-shared key mode
References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0112071405490.24375-100000@janpc-home.cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
Precedence: bulk

Jan Vilhuber wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Ricky Charlet wrote:
> 
> > Howdy,
> >
> >       I'm moving my position from 'in favor' to 'neutral' on saving a
> > pre-shared key authentication mode. Its not PSK itself or even current
> > look alike PSK functionality I'd like to see saved. There is a new
> > feature I want to see added and that is interaction with legacy
> > authentication systems in support of remote access users ala
> > draft-ietf-ipsra-reqmts-04.txt.
> 
> But then we should close down IPSRA, shouldn't we? Either we have IPSRA to
> take care of remote-access legacy methods, or we cancel that WG and fold the
> requirements back into the IPsec WG...
> 
> jan
>  --
> Jan Vilhuber                                            vilhuber@cisco.com
> Cisco Systems, San Jose                                     (408) 527-0847


	Let the consequenses be what they may. Does our working group have the
will to include IPSRA requirements into second generation IKE directly?
I hope so.

	(personally, I believe that IPSRA is close enough to finishing and the
second generation IKE debate is new enough that we could get fielded
implementations of PIC+IKEv1 which could inform our development of
second generation IKE protocols).


-- 
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary 
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  Ricky Charlet   : SonicWall Inc.   : usa (510) 497-2103

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email