[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: IPsec !?, was: Re: CGA Use with HBA in Shim6 IETF Meeting July 10, 2006
El 31/07/2006, a las 16:31, Francis Dupont escribió:
In your previous mail you wrote:
so, saying that IPSec provides much more benefits than HBA/CGA but
=> IPsec (cf RFC 4301 introduction).
cannot be used because they rely in an infrastructure that is
impossiible to deploy in a reasonable time frame is as good than to
that IPSec is not a viable alternative, which imho should be the
conclusion from this exchange, would you agree with that?
=> I agree if you add the word "general" in front of "alternative".
meaning for the general case (in particular for the case that there is
no IPSec SA currently being used for the communication)
To make the use of IPsec impossible as a limited alternative is more
arguable. To make shim6 and IPsec compatible is a third topics, the
question was opened by Jim and is not yet closed.
i don't see any problems with IPSec and shim compatibility.... do you
see any issues/troubles there? could you expand on this?