IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: is manual keying mandatory

"Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com> Thu, 19 March 1998 13:56 UTC

Received: (from majordom@localhost) by portal.ex.tis.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) id IAA16701 for ipsec-outgoing; Thu, 19 Mar 1998 08:56:29 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199803191408.JAA04688@jekyll.piermont.com>
To: William Dixon <wdixon@microsoft.com>
cc: 'Roy Pereira' <rpereira@TimeStep.com>, "IPSEC Mailing List (E-mail)" <ipsec@tis.com>
Subject: Re: is manual keying mandatory
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 18 Mar 1998 13:51:35 PST." <E301AC63A589D111B63100805F15808901000C18@red-msg-07.dns.microsoft.com>
Reply-To: perry@piermont.com
X-Reposting-Policy: redistribute only with permission
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.108)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 09:08:58 -0500
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com>
Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com
Precedence: bulk

William Dixon writes:
> Since we have put so much effort into IKE now, I don't think it should be a
> MUST.

I would strongly disagree. VERY strongly.

There are very real conditions in which people will want to exchange
keys by methods other than IKE. The difficulty of providing manual
configuration is so low that there is almost no savings in not making
it mandatory.

.pm

> Wm
> William Dixon,
> Program Manager,  IP Security
> Windows Networking Product Group
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:	Roy Pereira [SMTP:rpereira@TimeStep.com]
> > Sent:	Wednesday, March 18, 1998 1:15 PM
> > To:	IPSEC Mailing List (E-mail)
> > Subject:	is manual keying mandatory
> > 
> > Is manual keying a required feature of IPSec?  
> > In other words, if you do not support manual keying then are you
> > IPSec-compliant or not?
> > 
> > There seams to bea bit of confusion surrounding this topic and I would
> > like to see what people think.

v2.29.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status