Document authors: when might we have the update so Sean can move this forwards? 
We are gated on this before we solicit AD-VPN protocols.

--Paul Hoffman

On Apr 30, 2013, at 7:52 AM, Sean Turner <[email protected]> wrote:

> Please incorporate the QoS issue brought up by Toby.  I'd like to make sure 
> we have everything in the draft that the WG wants before issuing the WGLC.  I 
> also think the TSV/RTG directorates/ADs will be interested in that.
> 
> Can you explain the rationale for the following the changes to requirement 
> #5; I'm just not following it:
> 
> OLD:
> 
> 5. One ADVPN peer MUST NOT be able to impersonate another ADVPN       peer.
> 
> NEW:
> 
> 5. Any of the ADVPN Peers MUST NOT have a way to get the long term
> authentication credentials for any other ADVPN Peers. The compromise of an 
> Endpoint MUST NOT affect the security of communications between other ADVPN 
> Peers. The compromise of a Gateway SHOULD NOT affect the security of the 
> communications between ADVPN Peers not associated with that Gateway.
> 
> Is the first sentence still saying basically: "peers can't impersonate peers"?
> 
> Nits:
> 
> - sec 1.1: Need to add what an ADVPN is and expand the acronym
> 
> - sec 4/1.1: The terms allied and federated environment kind of come out of 
> nowhere.  Please add them to s1.1.  I just to make sure it's clear what the 
> difference is between the two.

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

Reply via email to