Re: [IPsec] Survey for WG interest in adoptingdraft-mglt-ipsecme-clone-ike-sa

<hat on: RFC 5723 co-author>

Hi Valery,

Have you looked at using session resumption (RFC 5723) for this, instead 
of coming up with a new mechanism?

Thanks,
	Yaron

On 11/27/2014 02:56 PM, Valery Smyslov wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> as a co-author of the draft I (obviously) support its adoption.
>
> I think that the mechanism it describes is useful and could be used
> as a building block for several solutions. For example,
> it can be used in load-sharing scenario when there are
> some gateways with different IP addresses, that share
> the same credentials. If client established IKE SA with
> any of them then the SA could be cloned and transfered
> to other nodes of this cluster without reauthentication,
> and the traffic from client then could be balanced
> among those gateways.
>
> Regards,
> Valery Smyslov.
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Hoffman" <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
> To: "IPsecME WG" <ipsec@ietf.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 11:06 PM
> Subject: [IPsec] Survey for WG interest in
> adoptingdraft-mglt-ipsecme-clone-ike-sa
>
>
>> <chair hats on>
>>
>> Greetings again. The "Clone IKE SA" proposal tries to optimize IKE SA
>> setup in cases where VPN gateways have multiple interfaces and want to
>> establish different SAs on the different interfaces without having to
>> repeat the IKE authentication. Instead, they could clone a single IKE
>> SA multiple times, and then move it to different interfaces using MOBIKE.
>>
>> If you agree with the need to standardize this usage, and believe that
>> draft-mglt-ipsecme-clone-ike-sa is likely to be a good starting place
>> for that standardization, and are willing to review and contribute
>> text to the document if it is adopted by the WG, please say so on the
>> list. This WG has a history of adopting documents but then not having
>> enough reviewers for us to feel confident that we are making a good
>> standard, so we need to see a reasonable number of actively interested
>> people before we adopt the document. If it is not adopted, the authors
>> can ask for it to be published as an RFC through individual submission
>> or by the Independent Submissions Editor.
>>
>> Please reply by December 8, 2015.
>>
>> --Paul Hoffman and Yaron Sheffer
>> _______________________________________________
>> IPsec mailing list
>> IPsec@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
>
> _______________________________________________
> IPsec mailing list
> IPsec@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec