On Feb 9, 2012, at 9:59 AM, Yaron Sheffer wrote:

> Hi Pearl, Tero,
> 
> Regarding the first change (IPsec Auth Methods), I prefer the existing 
> language. Even though IKEv1 has been obsoleted, I think change control of 
> this central piece of the protocol needs to still require a higher bar than 
> just "specification required".
> 
> I'm afraid my co-chair disagrees, but he can surely speak for himself...

I do, and I can. The overhead of requiring IETF and RFC Editor process for 
extensions to a popular-but-obsolete protocol is not worth it. If someone 
publishes a new authentication mechanism for IKEv1 that has significant flaws 
(and they certainly will), they publish a new document and it gets a new 
identifier. This will damp out fairly quickly, and auth mechanism developers 
will get more input before publishing.

--Paul Hoffman

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

Reply via email to