Re: [IPsec] WESP - Roadmap Ahead

Jack Kohn <kohn.jack@gmail.com> Tue, 17 November 2009 00:19 UTC

Return-Path: <kohn.jack@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipsec@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipsec@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4C353A679C for <ipsec@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Nov 2009 16:19:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YjUSbXu7SNao for <ipsec@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Nov 2009 16:19:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yx0-f192.google.com (mail-yx0-f192.google.com [209.85.210.192]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F379E3A6811 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Nov 2009 16:19:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: by yxe30 with SMTP id 30so6676057yxe.29 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Nov 2009 16:19:13 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=GGOaXglL1YlWoBsEBgXpSmEXLaK2zYBfEIU7tp+KE/A=; b=uAgN6bB1N8dwsQ5Vd+sbmdOfwGTR3VBwd9Yy0JMS5rXLjqKPEQTy2AB5x8R4Key8x0 yTJ4Kflg7B7KuHV1dQX9Q2/8McbWg/0PFcVt6riiwFFhz2YNmJs1Q2J83iowan52XvI6 y6cKHB8IXVBygR/ShFCUWsVGzgYmcX8sVez/E=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=AC4LAJTIXFKyktckpqZ6RaizrFMqR4ozv5pWTmFY3Lds0cmuP+Mjsc7h3OiIB69bfY FZz2VeKBAR4HOKrT81n5rnwyUSkG1ZkM+v/dfi6QSZLBYupidVZJI2oa4MbpaJnZdX5j O2pvJ9zRUMhj55/WOXbq/NjsSzIwwGVysYbyM=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.91.50.3 with SMTP id c3mr5330071agk.38.1258417153347; Mon, 16 Nov 2009 16:19:13 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <p06240805c7272bb53718@128.89.89.228>
References: <dc8fd0140911110805q67759507t6cf75a1e9d81c5aa@mail.gmail.com> <19200.8786.266973.313959@fireball.kivinen.iki.fi> <19201.20208.563706.519993@fireball.kivinen.iki.fi> <p06240805c7272bb53718@128.89.89.228>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 05:49:13 +0530
Message-ID: <dc8fd0140911161619w5ffb7df1l1bc8bb1d7d8e3437@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jack Kohn <kohn.jack@gmail.com>
To: Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: "ipsec@ietf.org" <ipsec@ietf.org>, "Bhatia, Manav \(Manav\)" <manav.bhatia@alcatel-lucent.com>, Tero Kivinen <kivinen@iki.fi>
Subject: Re: [IPsec] WESP - Roadmap Ahead
X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols <ipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 00:19:18 -0000

There multiple "implementation specific" optimizations available. One
such optimization that is currently in use in multiple platforms is:

Do the seq number check, and then place the packets in different
priority queues/paths based on the kind of packet it is. Proprietary
ASICs on the routers can easily do this and its one of those things
that differentiate one vendor from the other.

Jack

On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 9:48 PM, Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>; wrote:
> At 7:50 PM +0530 11/16/09, Bhatia, Manav (Manav) wrote:
>>
>> This is an implementation specific optimization that has already been
>> solved in multiple implementations.
>>
>> Cheers, Manav
>
> Is the phrase "implementation specific" a euphemism for non-standard?
>
> Steve
> _______________________________________________
> IPsec mailing list
> IPsec@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
>