Re: simplifying rekeying [draft-jenkins-ipsec-rekeying-06.txt]

[Paul Koning <[e-mail]>]

>>>>> "Dan" == Dan Harkins <[e-mail]> writes:

 Dan> On Sun, 16 Jul 2000 14:35:30 EDT you wrote
 >> We read the word "unique" as having its standard meaning and hence
 >> reach the stated conclusion.  You seem to read it as having some
 >> other unspecified meaning ("kind of rare"?) and hence essentially
 >> meaningless.  If you can read any word that vaguely, there is no
 >> standard.

 Dan> Sigh. I'll appeal to authority then. Websters's Encyclopedic
 Dan> Unabridged Dictionary ...

All this is of great academic interest to those of us who are language
buffs, but it in no way contributes to a useful technical discussion
on the merits of various key management algorithms.

>From what I can tell, the wording of the current spec on the
requirements for message IDs is ambiguous (witness this discussion).
So the conclusion is that the spec needs repair.  Can we please agree
on what the *technical* requirement is and proceed from there?  Once
that is known it should be possible to craft an English phrase that
clearly expresses the desired requirement.

	paul