IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Please review draft-ietf-pppext-l2tp-sec-03.txt

Patrice Calhoun <Patrice.Calhoun@Eng.Sun.Com> Tue, 24 March 1998 12:41 UTC

Received: (from majordom@localhost) by portal.ex.tis.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) id HAA02123 for ipsec-outgoing; Tue, 24 Mar 1998 07:41:23 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199803232240.OAA06543@hsmpka.eng.sun.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1998 14:40:07 -0800
From: Patrice Calhoun <Patrice.Calhoun@Eng.Sun.Com>
Reply-To: Patrice Calhoun <Patrice.Calhoun@Eng.Sun.Com>
Subject: Re: Please review draft-ietf-pppext-l2tp-sec-03.txt
To: ipsec@tis.com, rgm-sec@htt-consult.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-MD5: g+o1j7Mc0yuHwucL4cb/eg==
X-Mailer: dtmail 1.2.1 CDE Version 1.2.1 SunOS 5.6 sun4m sparc
Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com
Precedence: bulk

> X-Sender: rgm-sec@homebase.htt-consult.com
> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 12:36:26 -0500
> To: ipsec@tis.com
> From: Robert Moskowitz <rgm-sec@htt-consult.com>
> Subject: Please review draft-ietf-pppext-l2tp-sec-03.txt
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> 
> I know we are busy, but the L2TP crowd is working on their use of IPsec for
> protecting L2TP sessions.
> 
> I do not mean at all to question the abilities of the L2TP wg, but I
> suspect that there are many people here that are not on that list, and may
> want to study this, the first use of IPsec by another wg.
> 
> One interesting comment I have of this draft, is it does not actually
> reference any of the IPsec documents.

Bob,

I believe that you meant draft-ietf-pppext-l2tp-security-0x.txt. The draft you 
mentioned discussed security if no IP is available (i.e. L2TP over native ATM).

PatC

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email