Shoichi Sakane writes:
> This draft describes a scenario to use IKEv2 for a minimum specification.
> The document only allows one side to be a responder.

More correct way is to say, that this document only describes the
node which is always the initiator of the communication. 

> I would like to a little extend it. That means it allows both sides
> to be a responder.

To be able to act as responder requires to take more features from the
full IKEv2, and very soon you are better of with full IKEv2
implementation.

For example to be able to act as responder usually means that you need
to have some kind of policy decision module, i.e. which when given the
identity of the initiator will check whether that peer is allowed to
create connections, use specific algorithms, or do other things.

In the initiator end it is usually simple, as you simply only offer
the things you support, and when you are initiating the connection you
already have your policy specified. 

> Here is an example scenario, in a scenario of smart metering, both a
> meter and a server have a power line, but the power consumption
> should be lesser as much as possible. The network is lossy. The
> resource of the device is typically constrained, for example, memory
> or physical size.

I would except that the smart meter meter would be the one using
implementation like described in draft-kivinen-ipsecme-ikev2-minimal,
and the server where that meter connects to needs to support full
IKEv2. For example usually there is multiple meters for each server
meaning that the server needs to support multiple simultaneous IKEv2
SAs, IPsec SAs, and it needs to do policy lookups based on the
identity of the meter device etc.

In the server end there is also some features of the IKEv2 which can
be left out (for example configuration mode, nat traversal (depending
on the network), etc), but in this document I tried to concentrate on
the very minimal implementation. 
-- 
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec

Reply via email to