Subject: Re: Internet Draft for explicit security labels in IPv6.

From: Stephen Kent <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 16:15:09 -0500

Kais,

>Greetings,
>
>IPv4 had IPSO and CIPSO for labeling of packets assuming we're operating
>within the premises of a trusted infrastructure.
>IPv6 only has the implicit labeling by having different IPsec SAs convey
>different labels.
>We think there is a need to have explicit labels in IPv6, whether or not
>IPsec is used.
>

Ipsec allows for both implicit and explicit labelling, according to 
RFC 2401. If one wishes to carry explicit security labels in the IP 
header, and to protect the integrity and authenticity of these 
labels, there are two options: use AH or use tunnel mode ESP and have 
the labels appear only in the inner IP header.

Steve
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Kais Belgaied <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 19:17:30 -0800 (PST)

Greetings,

Please see draft-belgaied-ipv6-lsopt-00.txt

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-belgaied-ipv6-lsopt-00.txt

Regards,
Kais.

---

From: "Joseph D. Harwood" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 09:11:09 -0800

This sounds like it mandates the use of AH, is that correct?

Best Regards,
Joseph D. Harwood
[email-masked]
www.vesta-corp.com 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked]
> [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Kais Belgaied
> Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2001 7:18 PM
> To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: Internet Draft for explicit security labels in IPv6.
> 
> 
> Greetings,
>