IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: draft-ietf-ipsec-pki-profile-01.txt

Brian Korver <briank@xythos.com> Fri, 15 November 2002 20:42 UTC

Received: from lists.tislabs.com (portal.gw.tislabs.com [192.94.214.101]) by above.proper.com (8.11.6/8.11.3) with ESMTP id gAFKgmg10221; Fri, 15 Nov 2002 12:42:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by lists.tislabs.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) id PAA27153 Fri, 15 Nov 2002 15:07:22 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 12:04:28 -0800
Subject: Re: draft-ietf-ipsec-pki-profile-01.txt
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v546)
Cc: ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
To: khaja.ahmed@attbi.com
From: Brian Korver <briank@xythos.com>
In-Reply-To: <E18CjvF-0005w5-00@mail.xythos.com>
Message-Id: <7221BE96-F8D5-11D6-A746-000393751598@xythos.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.546)
X-Envelope-To: ipsec@lists.tislabs.com, khaja.ahmed@attbi.com
Sender: owner-ipsec@lists.tislabs.com
Precedence: bulk

On Friday, November 15, 2002, at 09:00 AM, khaja.ahmed@attbi.com wrote:
> Brian,
>
> In section 4.1.3 the propsed truth table would be even clearer if you 
> could
> use some verb in the "What to do column" instead of the 'ok'.  
> Something as
> clear as the 'fail'.

Absolutely.


>
> In the road warrior scenario discussed WRT to section 3.3.9.1, are 
> there any
> disadvantages to prescribing/recommending something lighter and real 
> time like
> OCSP?

I don't believe there is any standard for doing so for IPsec.

-brian
briank@xythos.com

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email