There's a typo in the proposed text to #147: "is further" -> "if further".
Thanks,
Yaron
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
> Of Tero Kivinen
> Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2010 14:27
> To: Yoav Nir
> Cc: 'ipsec'
> Subject: [IPsec] yet more ikev2bis issues
>
> Yoav Nir writes:
> > Issue #147 - Allowing limited retransmission of one-way IKE messages
> > ====================================================================
> > Either in 2.1 or in 1.5 we should say something about allowing
> > limited retransmission of the rare one-way IKE messages, for
> > reliability.
> >
> > How about the following new paragraph at the end of 2.1:
> > The retransmission policy for one-way messages is somewhat
> different
> > from that of regular messages. Since no acknowledgement is ever
> sent,
> > there is no reason to gratuitously retransmit. Since all these
> > messages are errors, it makes sense to send them only once per
> > "offending" packet, and retransmit is further offending packets
> are
> > received. Still, it makes sense to limit retransmissions of such
> > error messages.
>
> That text looks good.
>
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
