[IPsec] ADVPN proposals

Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 15 July 2013 04:45 UTC

Return-Path: <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADCB221F9DB2 for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 21:45:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1hoTIIYhk0iD for <ipsec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 21:45:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ee0-x231.google.com (mail-ee0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4013:c00::231]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D479921F9DA9 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 21:45:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ee0-f49.google.com with SMTP id b57so7233988eek.36 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 21:45:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:x-forwarded-message-id:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ud5M3TriZ3SHr7+Ft13fbtC2w9evUZJQ6ScRwyK9LJo=; b=tAbXWUNZtFt/PUg4tR8luZcni5ZdLYVMfxRWog9Vt62zTfGFbiwo4K6GBKcwLaaL4U kJdFs3ytdYII/jVWjwEUNgOvwptDGkfyrIXMQ9KcBd/Pc60r7+fmpdKSjXJ5iEkM2plD xeMrCAcydbp3CKmvJjjAsE255NSPEf3DUUcXe4/jaQ2Ciyn1D9sDpyVesvK3A9qpRt5D 9UZjElP46dh6WkoWY6iOSo8rNktEgIrS+ubORY/DXiZbszJmkFdQ7/YjRbsIGMyi6mbV biuXgRxrbTHuOPvVO+mksxvDBrTjnnDonfAMsFEqgHRT6vBfD71sW91UDhNcxsBni/a9 mEhg==
X-Received: by 10.15.94.142 with SMTP id bb14mr57067275eeb.112.1373863522950; Sun, 14 Jul 2013 21:45:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.0.7] (bzq-79-176-175-149.red.bezeqint.net. [79.176.175.149]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id e44sm99411248eeh.11.2013.07.14.21.45.21 for <ipsec@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 14 Jul 2013 21:45:22 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <51E37E60.5030308@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 07:45:20 +0300
From: Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.ietf@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130623 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: IPsecme WG <ipsec@ietf.org>
References: <A7D4289A-DC08-47F1-9B18-02259893A84A@vpnc.org>
In-Reply-To: <A7D4289A-DC08-47F1-9B18-02259893A84A@vpnc.org>
X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <A7D4289A-DC08-47F1-9B18-02259893A84A@vpnc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [IPsec] ADVPN proposals
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipsec>
List-Post: <mailto:ipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec>, <mailto:ipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 04:45:24 -0000

<co-chair hats on>

Greetings again. The WG is starting to see proposals for our main work 
item, Auto Discovery VPNs (ADVPNs). The chairs are aware of two relevant 
drafts:
    draft-sathyanarayan-ipsecme-advpn
    draft-mao-ipsecme-ad-vpn-protocol
The chairs would appreciate hearing, on-list or off-list, whether others 
plan to submit proposals.

It is our strong hope that each of the proposals discuss in detail how 
the proposal relates to the ADVPN requirements that the WG has recently 
finished (draft-ietf-ipsecme-ad-vpn-problem, which will soon be on its 
way to the RFC Editor), and that the initial discussion of the drafts 
here on the list focus on the match between the proposal and the 
requirements. It is easy to start focusing on the technology used in 
such proposals, and the WG will get there, but we want to be sure 
anything we talk about meets the WG's requirements before we spend much 
time on the technical choices.

To that end, we encourage WG members to start commenting on the 
proposals with an eye to the requirements, particularly the requirements 
that are most important to each of you. The presentations at the WG 
meeting in Berlin (which is about two weeks away) will focus on the 
requirements, and we would really appreciate it if everyone has read the 
proposals before the meeting. Having an active discussion on the list in 
the next two weeks will help make our meeting time even more useful.

--Paul Hoffman and Yaron Sheffer