IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: replay field size

Ran Atkinson <rja@inet.org> Thu, 13 February 1997 04:01 UTC

Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa02709; 12 Feb 97 23:01 EST
Received: from portal.ex.tis.com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa14218; 12 Feb 97 23:01 EST
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by portal.ex.tis.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) id WAA01768 for ipsec-outgoing; Wed, 12 Feb 1997 22:47:44 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 03:45:21 +0000
From: Ran Atkinson <rja@inet.org>
Subject: Re: replay field size
To: Derrell Piper <piper@tgv.com>, ipsec@tis.com
X-Mailer: Chameleon ATX 6.0, Standards Based IntraNet Solutions, NetManage Inc.
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
References: <199702122218.OAA07059@fluffy.cisco.com>
Message-ID: <Chameleon.855805681.rja@c8-a.snvl1.sfba.home.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com
Precedence: bulk

Derrell,

  The IPng Working Group decided a long while back that all headers used
with IPv6 MUST be 64-bit aligned.  If the IPsec WG wants to not support
64-bit alignment, that matter would have to be also raised for discussion
with the IPng Working Group for their approval (in addition to normal
IESG approvals).  In short, the topic of alignment is broader than just
the IPsec WG and will need broader review and consensus before it changes.

  This is just to clarify the process, not to argue pro or con.

Ran
rja@inet.org

v2.28.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status