Vishwas and I have updated the AD VPN Problem Statement
and Requirements draft to address the comments received
on the previous version and remaining comments from
earlier email discussions. The new version is available at

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ipsecme-ad-vpn-problem

A summary of the changes in this version is included at
the end of this message.

Please review this document and provide any comments on
the existing requirements or suggestions for new ones.

For requirement 3, Vishwas will be starting an email
thread soon so that the WG can discuss what this text
means, whether we want to keep it, and how it can be
made clearer.

Thanks,

Steve

------------

Summary of Changes in draft-ietf-ipsecme-ad-vpn-00.txt

* Changed draft name from p2p-vpn to ad-vpn.

* Added a paragraph for each requirement, explaining how
  that requirement is driven by the use cases.

* In requirement 1, defined what we mean by minimizing
  configuration changes.

* In requirement 2, explained that this requirement implies
  that SPD entries and other configuration based on peer
  IP address will need to be automatically updated when
  the peer's IP address changes.

* Split requirement 4 into two requirements (now 4 and 5).

* In requirement 6 (formerly 5), explained what we mean
  by "easy handoff of sessions": avoid TCP session breakage
  and packet loss, when possible.

* In requirement 8 (formerly 7), acknowledged the difficulty
  of handling cases where gateways are behind NATs or where
  two endpoints are both behind separate NATs. In those cases,
  we may need to use workarounds such as port forwarding by
  the NATs or falling back to a hub and spoke architecture.

* Added new requirement 9 around manageability.

* Added new requirement 10 around cross-organization use.

* Added new requirement 11 saying that administrators should
  be able to limit topologies for security and other reasons.

* Fixed typos and other minor wording issues.

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

Reply via email to