On Tue, Jan 05, 2010 at 02:52:55PM +0200, Tero Kivinen wrote:
<SNIP!>

> If we really want to make WESP as specified in the charter, it would
> be much better to make it so it can be added incrementally to the ESP
> processing, i.e. just like UDP encapsulation for NAT-traversal can be
> do. This would mean that the WESP processing could be applied after
> the normal ESP processing, and WESP would simply add extra header to
> the beginning, and nothing else. The current draft already makes sure
> all the fields in the WESP header are verified by the IPsec recipient
> thus there is really no need to add ICV to cover them (if extensions
> are added then ICV needs cover them, which makes it impossible to
> implement WESP as incremental change to ESP).

Yes -- this would allow WESP to be an attribute one adds to an ESP SA.  Not
unlike NAT-Traversal, it could be negotiated by IKE.

Dan
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec

Reply via email to