Paul and I agree that a discussion is needed, and we will open this discussion
in a week's time, when most of the WG members are back from vacation.
In the meantime, Happy Holidays!
Yaron
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Steven Bellovin
Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2009 1:06
To: Masood, Faisal
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [IPsec] WESP encryption support
On Dec 21, 2009, at 7:08 PM, Masood, Faisal wrote:
> The support of WESP encryption, as it currently stands in the draft,
> is important and we would like to discuss this in detail but many of
> our core team members are away for the holidays.
>
The issue is certainly seen as important by some members of the community.
This is at least the third time it's come up -- I know; I brought it to the
IPsec working group myself the first time, many years ago. The consensus was
always not to proceed, because there were also strong arguments against it.
I'm not saying that yesterday's decision has to be tomorrow's; I am saying that
so contentious an issue should not be decided via the back door.
--Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
Scanned by Check Point Total Security Gateway.
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
