Re: Do we need ?
Karen Seo <kseo@bbn.com> Tue, 17 March 1998 04:11 UTC
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by portal.ex.tis.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) id XAA12342 for ipsec-outgoing; Mon, 16 Mar 1998 23:11:37 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199803170422.XAA21852@relay.hq.tis.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 1998 23:19:14 -0500
From: Karen Seo <kseo@bbn.com>
To: "srinivasrao.kulkarni" <srinu@trinc.com>
cc: ipsec@tis.com
Subject: Re: Do we need ?
Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com
Precedence: bulk
Hello, Oops, Section 5.1.1 is correct. We had changed it in the February draft (as noted below) and missed the text in 4.4.3. [from list of changes -- email 2/20...] 18. Section "5.1.1. Selecting and Using an SA or SA Bundle" [outbound processing] -- Several issues have come up. a) How much searching of the SPD and SAD should be done before creating a new SA? * Several approaches to this have been brought up on the list, e.g., see email from S. Kent 12/7/97 in reply to Ly Loi (Subj: "Re: IPSEC arch comments"). There is a tradeoff between spending more time to search the SAD to avoid creating unnecessary SAs and using more space by creating potentially redundant SAs by using the first SPD hit (if it does not point to a matching SA). One possible enhancement would be to note which policies create overlapping SAs when the SPD is created. There weren't many comments, but the general feeling seemed to be in favor of creating an SA for the first policy hit rather than searching the whole SAD. Thank you, Karen
- Do we need ? srinivasrao.kulkarni
- Re: Do we need ? Karen Seo