draft-ietf-ipsec-isakmp-mode-cfg-04.txt

Daniel Harkins <dharkins@cisco.com> Mon, 04 January 1999 19:44 UTC

Message-Id: <199901041710.JAA17521@dharkins-ss20.cisco.com>
To: ipsec@tis.com
Subject: draft-ietf-ipsec-isakmp-mode-cfg-04.txt
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <17519.915469858.1@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1999 09:10:58 -0800
From: Daniel Harkins <dharkins@cisco.com>
Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com
Precedence: bulk

  I just noticed that draft-ietf-ipsec-isakmp-mode-cfg-04.txt (which
has expired by the way) uses the value 6 for the exchange. This value
is from a pool, 6-31, reserved for future ISAKMP use. Exchanges which
use ISAKMP are supposed to use exchanges from either the DOI Specific
pool (which is why IKE exchanges start at 32) or from the Private Use
Range. Which brings up another point. There is no "reserved to IANA" pool 
for new exchanges. Is that an oversight? 

  How does the WG envision advancing drafts which define new exchanges
to standards track? The IANA Considerations section of RFC2408 mentions
that "Security Protocols" have to have a standards-track RFC to have
a magic number assigned but there's no pool to assign it from. And what
should draft-ietf-ipsec-isakmp-mode-cfg-04.txt do? Use a Private Use
number until (if?) it's advanced to standards track when it can get
an IANA-assigned number? 

  Various people have more exchanges in the works. The procedure should
be defined before draft writers start assigning numbers themselves and
conflicts arise.

  Dan.

draft-ietf-ipsec-isakmp-mode-cfg-04.txt Daniel Harkins