Re: [IPsec] WESP - Roadmap Ahead

Jack Kohn <kohn.jack@gmail.com> Sat, 21 November 2009 17:39 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 AAAF43A696C for <ipsec@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 21 Nov 2009 09:39:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.499
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.100, 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 uMJGwYmCivcC for <ipsec@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 21 Nov 2009 09:39:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yw0-f185.google.com (mail-yw0-f185.google.com [209.85.211.185]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA4243A6960 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Sat, 21 Nov 2009 09:39:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: by ywh15 with SMTP id 15so4145086ywh.5 for <ipsec@ietf.org>; Sat, 21 Nov 2009 09:39:36 -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=p5cin/nXmd5h23yHxxusSGl1QhuSJquelQaH1buNK1w=; b=EuWBLZVHh//oOfcANz/SIT62sx4ZGCi640fYeSBv3pn9YZBUjfFysbExKdLrW76z98 FMdhalTpZsBoBsUgXdi+4nwTQ0xB98Uh7AckMJjvd7pQpHw2sbn293i1aX64uueu66hE HDSkIDKJ7GVD1aJit63TYk58mRQCsQ6lEXAM8=
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=TTlRYvqSyg47n7C7DWnSPrkqmnaBNDL6XsPMrrL+jwHPF9OsLpjTPuoGOP2QPMp1+f E4bWgf6znyAVzDVARiaaVriQ8+ahCLaGagUZ7duz+P6aeV7sgsopsdBcPbYDk3tQl4qO F+KTJSB1P/Kg6x/aSSzuKhYwiZfTqvhNuN458=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.91.164.17 with SMTP id r17mr4292943ago.92.1258825176022; Sat, 21 Nov 2009 09:39:36 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <p06240804c729109c4f93@10.1.231.26>
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> <f1548840911171103m4d39e544q236448d4b1c8eefe@mail.gmail.com> <p06240804c729109c4f93@10.1.231.26>
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 23:09:35 +0530
Message-ID: <dc8fd0140911210939i4113200ckbfadb5e0a5ea9b50@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: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 17:39:44 -0000

Steve,

>
> 4301 contains We have explicit directions on how to use multiple SAs when
> the peers know that they want to send traffic with different QoS parameters.
> This appears to be an instance where the middle boxes are to examining
> traffic, and putting in into different QoS queues. That raises the question

You got it all wrong. The sender is sending packets with the same QoS
parameters; its the receiver thats trying to prioritize some packets
over the others. One would typically do this for the Hellos/KeepAlives
that are associated with a protocol, so that the  adjacency/peering
session are not timed out.

Jack