Brian,
Just want to confirm that Vishwas solution closes this issue. Agreed?
Thanks,
Lou
On 12/14/2012 4:56 PM, Brian Weis wrote:
> Hi Lou,
>
> On Dec 14, 2012, at 10:15 AM, Lou Berger <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Brian,
>> Opps, should have replied to this message (and not the prior).
>>
>> My previous mail basically said the new requirement is placed on the
>> ADVPN solution, not a particular implementation. I think it's important
>> to ensure that the overall solution provides for Requirement 14, and I'm
>> not sure how this can be done without a requirement.
>
> If I understand correctly, these requirements are intending to be relevant to
> "ADVPN solutions" that don't include network infrastructure. It doesn't make
> sense to me to make a "ADVPN solution" implemented on PCs and comprised
> exclusively of PCs subject to this as a general requirement.
>
> All other MUST requirements in Section 4 seem to apply equally to all use
> cases.
>
>>
>> See below for additional specific responses.
>
> [snip]
>
>>> Lou, would something like the following text in Section 2.2 be a
>>> satisfactory replacement for Requirement 14?
>>>
>>> There is also the case when L3VPNs operate over IPsec Tunnels,
>>> for example Provider Edge (PE) based VPN's. An AD VPN must
>>> support L3VPN as an application protected by the IPsec
>>> Tunnels.
>>
>> it he must was a MUST, sure.
>
> I'd happily support a MUST here. There aren't any other MUSTs outside of
> Section 4, but I don't know why.
>
> Thanks,
> Brian
>
>>
>> Lou
>
> _______________________________________________
> IPsec mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
