Re: is manual keying mandatory

Ran Atkinson <rja@inet.org> Tue, 24 March 1998 04:52 UTC

Received: (from majordom@localhost) by portal.ex.tis.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) id XAA29075 for ipsec-outgoing; Mon, 23 Mar 1998 23:52:19 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 04:50:51 +0000
From: Ran Atkinson <rja@inet.org>
Subject: Re: is manual keying mandatory
To: Steve Sneddon <sned@cisco.com>
Cc: ipsec@tis.com
X-Mailer: Chameleon ATX 6.0, Standards Based IntraNet Solutions, NetManage Inc.
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
References: <3516DD14.D23C6BDE@ire-ma.com>
Message-ID: <Chameleon.890715195.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

Without manual keying, multicast sessions cannot be protected.
While other rationales exist for supporting manual keying,
that is a _sufficient_ justification for making it mandatory
to implement.

More to the point, those of you trying to sell your products
through my employer to our customers (that's nearly all of
you, including MS and Cisco) will find we aren't very interested 
in an product that doesn't include support for manual keying.

Manual key management isn't hard to build and no one has to use it,
so marketing arguments just don't hold water.

Ran