Subject: [Mip6] comments on draft-ietf-mip6-ikev2-ipsec-02.txt

From: Francis Dupont <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2005 12:32:50 +0200

The last two requirements of section 4.2 are confusing because they
are not required by this I-D but by RFC 3775. I propose to add
the references.

I am still strongly against the first 4.3 requirements. In fact today
many security gateways don't support protocol (so ports) in traffic selectors
(because this solves the issue of fragment handling, cf the OPAQUE stuff
in 2401bis). I.e., fine gain selectors are fine but should be made
mandatory, so please downgrade to a SHOULD.

... (to be continued)

[email-masked]

_______________________________________________
Mip6 mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6

---

From: Vijay Devarapalli <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 17:27:58 -0700

> are not required by this I-D but by RFC 3775. I propose to add

actually they are mentioned in RFC 3776. initially they werent
in this draft at all. but people mentioned that it is better
to make the document self-contained wrt requirements. so I had
copied these requirements from RFC 3776. but you are right,
3775 is the right place to mandate this.

> mandatory, so please downgrade to a SHOULD.

changed it to SHOULD

Vijay