ikev2bis draft-04 section 1.5 adds about INVALID_MAJOR_VERSION:
There are two cases when such a one-way notification is sent:
INVALID_IKE_SPI and INVALID_SPI. These notifications are sent
outside of an IKE SA. Note that such notifications are explicitly
not Informational exchanges; these are one-way messages that must not
be responded to. (INVALID_MAJOR_VERSION is also a one-way message
which is sent outside of an IKE SA, although it is sent as a response
to the incoming IKE SA creation.)
I feel it confusing. Probably "such a one-way notification" should be
"a one-way notification". I don't understand why
INVALID_MAJOR_VERSION case need to be separated from INVALID_IKE_SPI
and INVALID_SPI.
The word "notification message" seems somewhat ambiguous and
confusing. In section 3.10, it refers to a Notification payload
rather than an entire message. In some other places I suppose it
means an INFORMATIONAL exchange request message.
Come to think of it, I note there are two expressions in the draft:
"Notify payload" and "Notification payload". Also in most places
"INFORMATIONAL exchange" whereas there are some "Informational
exchange" and "informational exchange".
FUKUMOTO Atsushi
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
