Re: Replay field size in AH

Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com> Mon, 10 February 1997 04:37 UTC

Received: (from majordom@localhost) by portal.ex.tis.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) id XAA05775 for ipsec-outgoing; Sun, 9 Feb 1997 23:37:03 -0500 (EST)
X-Sender: kent@po1.bbn.com
Message-Id: <v03007801af2454f8c03c@[128.33.229.241]>
In-Reply-To: <3.0.16.19970209105421.3847cd10@pop3.pn.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 09 Feb 1997 23:33:32 -0500
To: Rodney Thayer <rodney@sabletech.com>
From: Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>
Subject: Re: Replay field size in AH
Cc: ipsec@tis.com
Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com
Precedence: bulk

Rodney,

	The AH and ESP specs have been redone, but need another pass to
deal with some outstanding issues, e.g., the counter size issue that is
still being debated in messages from this weekend.  The IPSEC architecture
document needs considerably more work.

	As for AH, no, it is not going away, since, as Ran pointed out, it
still offers slightly different features as compared to ESP without
encryption.  However, the motivations for using AH re more narrow than
before, due to the changes in ESP.

Steve

Replay field size in AH Naganand Doraswamy
Re: Replay field size in AH Ran Atkinson
Re: Replay field size in AH Stephen Kent
RE: Replay field size in AH Rob Adams
Re: Replay field size in AH Ran Atkinson
Re: Replay field size in AH Rodney Thayer
Re: Replay field size in AH Stephen Kent