From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 11:44:07 -0500 (EST)

([email-masked] [192.94.214.100])
	by lists.tislabs.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA13866
	Tue, 11 Nov 2003 09:50:24 -0500 (EST)
via csmap (V6.0)
	id srcAAAdoaOSy; Tue, 11 Nov 03 09:58:02 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: kent@localhost
Message-Id: <p06010200bbd5fc9d6a5f@[130.129.139.103]>
In-Reply-To: <[email-masked]>
References: <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 21:47:54 -0500
To: Jonathan Stone <[email-masked]>
From: Stephen Kent <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Meta-comment: use of "red" / "black" terminology...
Cc: [email-masked]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
boundary="============_-1143560184==_ma============"
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.28 (www . roaringpenguin . com / mimedefang)
Sender: [email-masked]
Precedence: bulk

--============_-1143560184==_ma============
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"

At 15:00 -0800 11/10/03, Jonathan Stone wrote:
>   >VPNs are not the genesis of the terminology. The terms arose in the
>>DoD context 50 years ago, well before there was a notion of VPNs.
>
>I'm well aware of that.  But it's a non-sequitur to my response to and
>Ted's second point, which I can only assume you missed:
>
>>   [...] the use
>>   of "red" and "black" lingo has also been accompanied by diagrams that
>>   only address the use of IPsec in tunnel mode and assume the
>   > VPN/Securitygateway model.

I question your use of the term "non-sequitur" here, but let me
respond again, with less subtlety,

You asserted that the terms were misleading because IPsec is more
than VPNs, and you were doing IPsec-like things before IPsec.  well,
I was developing IPsec like protocols 25 years ago, for host-to-host
secure communication, and we referred to the interfaces for the BITW
systems we built then as red and black, so what exactly your point?

Moreover, the fact that Ted noted the association of the these terms
with a diagram that happens to use tunnel mode is of little
consequence. It is one instance of their use, In today's IPsec WG
meeting, I used several diagrams that were labelled with red and
black interfaces, and made no mention of tunnel mode. So, again, what
is your point?

Steve
--============_-1143560184==_ma============
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 }
  --></style><title>Re: Meta-comment: use of &quot;red&quot; /
&quot;black&quot; terminology...</title></head><body>
<div>At 15:00 -0800 11/10/03, Jonathan Stone wrote:</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>&gt;VPNs are not the genesis of the
terminology. The terms arose in the<br>
&gt;DoD context 50 years ago, well before there was a notion of
VPNs.<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>I'm well aware of that.&nbsp; But it's a
non-sequitur to my response to and<br>
Ted's second point, which I can only assume you missed:<br>
<br>
&gt; [...] the use<br>
&gt; of &quot;red&quot; and &quot;black&quot; lingo has also been
accompanied by diagrams that<br>
&gt; only address the use of IPsec in tunnel mode and assume
the</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>&gt; VPN/Securitygateway
model.</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>I question your use of the term &quot;non-sequitur&quot; here,
but let me respond again, with less subtlety,</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>You asserted that the terms were misleading because IPsec is more
than VPNs, and you were doing IPsec-like things before IPsec.&nbsp;
well, I was developing IPsec like protocols 25 years ago, for
host-to-host secure communication, and we referred to the interfaces
for the BITW systems we built then as red and black, so what
exactly<u> your</u> point?</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Moreover, the fact that Ted noted the association of the these
terms with a diagram that happens to use tunnel mode is of little
consequence. It is one instance of their use, In today's IPsec WG
meeting, I used several diagrams that were labelled with red and black
interfaces, and made no mention of tunnel mode. So, again, what is
your point?</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Steve</div>
</body>
</html>
--============_-1143560184==_ma============--