On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 02:31:12PM -0400, James Cloos wrote: > >>>>> "Eugen" == Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Eugen> I'm not sure what the status of http://postel.org/anonsec/ > > The IETF just created a new list and subscribed all anonsec subscribers: > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/btns
Indeed. But it's as quiet as the old list :/ Seriously, the work of the BTNS WG is, IMO, crucial to the use of IPsec as an end-to-end solution (as opposed to as a VPN solution, for which IPsec is already pretty darned good). If you care, then please participate, or even better, implement. That anyone is working on IPETEE indicates that end-to-end IPsec solutions are desired. The in-band nature of the IPETEE key exchange indicates, to me, a dislike of IKE, or perhaps unawareness of BTNS WG (man, the WG's name doesn't reflect very well what it does), or perhaps a misunderstanding of IPsec. Nico -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
