Re: More inadequacies in draft-ietf-ipsec-ipsec-doi-03.txt...

Ben Rogers <ben@Ascend.COM> Fri, 12 September 1997 19:57 UTC

Received: (from majordom@localhost) by portal.ex.tis.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) id PAA09721 for ipsec-outgoing; Fri, 12 Sep 1997 15:57:09 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 15:24:50 -0400
Message-Id: <199709121924.PAA28356@carp.morningstar.com>
From: Ben Rogers <ben@Ascend.COM>
To: Roy Shamir <roy@CheckPoint.COM>
Cc: Daniel Harkins <dharkins@cisco.com>, ipsec@tis.com
Subject: Re: More inadequacies in draft-ietf-ipsec-ipsec-doi-03.txt...
In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970901212207.006961a0@cale.checkpoint.com>
References: <1.5.4.32.19970901212207.006961a0@cale.checkpoint.com>
Reply-To: ben@Ascend.COM
Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com
Precedence: bulk

Well, looks like I'll be joining the minority in doing so...

What I really _meant_ to ask is whether anyone was able to make an
implementation without assistance apart from the drafts (reference
implementation was the first thought -- mailing list is the second).
And, its not really a valid question, because I'm almost certain that
the answer is going to be 'no'.  If we're trying to get these drafts
ready in any reasonable amount of time, something really needs to be
done now to eliminate the inadequacies and self-contradictions within
them.

ben


Roy Shamir writes:
> I second Greg. We've never looked at the reference implementation.
> 
> Roy
> 
> At 06:23 AM 9/11/97 -0700, you wrote:
> >> Has anyone been able to produce interoperable code without using the
> >> reference implementation?
> >
> >Ahh, errr, well... PAY NO ATTENTION TO THE MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN!
> >
> >  Dan.
> >
> >
> >
>