Here’s a proposed set of question for RFC 3948 implementers:

The following questions document whether your implementation supports the 
syntax and semantics of the protocol:

- Which of the following packet formats does your implementation support:
        - UDP-Encapsulated ESP Header Format (y/n):
        - IKE Header Format for Port 4500 (y/n):
        - NAT-Keepalive Packet Format (y/n):

- Which of the following encapsulation and decapsulation processing rules does 
your implementation support:
        - Auxiliary Processing
                - Tunnel Mode Decapsulation NAT Procedure (y/n):
                - Transport Mode Decapsulation NAT Procedure  (y/n):
        - Transport Mode ESP Encapsulation (y/n):
        - Transport Mode ESP Decapsulation (y/n):
        - Tunnel Mode ESP Encapsulation (y/n):
        - Tunnel Mode ESP Decapsulation (y/n):

- Does your implementation support the NAT keepalive procedure? (y/n):

The following questions document whether interoperability has been achieved as 
well as other intangibles the IESG will be interested.

- What evidence do you have that your implementation can interoperate with 
other implementations?
- In your opinion, are there unused features in the RFC that greatly increase 
implementation complexity?

Additional information (optional):

spt

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

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

Reply via email to