Re: [RPSEC] Discontiguous Deployment (Show of Hands)....

In message <Pine.LNX.4.64.0701300746260.14084@m106.maoz.com>
Tony Tauber writes:
>  
> > This might be a good replacement for your third bullet.
> >
> > -   o  In an environment where both secured and non-secured systems are
> > -      interoperating a mechanism MUST exist for secured systems to
> > -      identify whether an originator intended the information to be
> > -      secured.
> >
> >
> >   o  In an environment where secured service is in the process of
> >      being deplyed a mechanism MUST exist to support a transition
> >      free of service interruption.
>  
> I think the original bullet is about something else and still has
> merit, but I like your addition.

Briefly - Yes I agree.

[Aside: This was an email edit problem on my part.  I reread your
third bullet and realized that this was a different point so I didn't
add the + on the addition but forgot to go back and edit the part
above that.  Brain temporarily disconnected from fingers.  Seems to be
reconnected at this point.]

Curtis

_______________________________________________
RPSEC mailing list
RPSEC@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rpsec