Re: Re[2]: AH (without ESP) on a secure gateway

Uri Blumenthal <uri@watson.ibm.com> Wed, 04 December 1996 20:14 UTC

Received: (from majordom@localhost) by portal.ex.tis.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) id PAA27492 for ipsec-outgoing; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 15:14:57 -0500 (EST)
From: Uri Blumenthal <uri@watson.ibm.com>
Message-Id: <9612042017.AA174418@hawpub.watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Re[2]: AH (without ESP) on a secure gateway
To: rja@cisco.com
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 1996 15:17:12 -0500
Cc: ipsec@tis.com
In-Reply-To: <199612041911.LAA02222@cornpuffs.cisco.com> from "Ran Atkinson" at Dec 4, 96 11:11:35 am
Reply-To: uri@watson.ibm.com
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25]
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com
Precedence: bulk

Ran Atkinson says:
> I believe that ESP should continue to always imply that encryption is
> in use.  The presence/absence of encryption is the primary reason that AH is
> separate from ESP..................Comments ?

I support your position.
-- 
Regards,
Uri		uri@watson.ibm.com
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
<Disclaimer>