Subject: Re: [NSIS] RMD-QoS-NSLP model draft submitted to NSIS

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:01:06 +0100

Hi Nary,

QoS NSLP has POLICY_DATA in its current version of the spec. Even if GIMPS
provides integrity, I am not sure it is unneeded in QoS NSLP (e.g. if QoS
NSLP is carrying information that is opaque for (some) intermediate nodes).

Sven

"Thanh Tra LUU" <[email-masked]>@ietf.org on 17/02/2004 15:53:29

Sent by:    [email-masked]

To:    <[email-masked]>
cc:
Subject:    Re: [NSIS] RMD-QoS-NSLP model draft submitted to NSIS

hi Sven,

> Sven>> Imho, the QoS NSLP should rely on GIMPS for some/most of its
> security services but GIMPS alone is not sufficient because it does not
> protect against compromised QNEs, only against their interconnection.

do you mean QoS-NSLP would support authentication policy elements (as rsvp)
and NTLP would support integrity elements (in rsvp) or QoS-NSLP may do all
in some cases ?

Nary Tra,
ENST, Paris.

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

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

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 16:30:15 +0100

nary,

QoS-NSLP POLICY_DATA object carries policy elements for authorization 
purposes between two policy-capable nodes. like what was done in RSVP.

how far QoS-NSLP relies on NTLP for the so-called integrity objects 
(RSVP terminology) is the issue.

yacine