Thanks!

Sent from my iPad

> On 20 May 2015, at 14:49, Yoav Nir <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi, Frederic
> 
> That sounds mostly correct. 
> 
> In IKEv1 capabilities were usually declared in VendorIDs. In IKEv2 they are 
> mostly declared in notifications within IKE_SA_INIT.  Why the difference? No 
> idea. It’s just the way other extensions were done, but with a private 
> extension you can do either.
> 
> Whether the parameters are passed in new payloads, notify payloads or Config 
> attributes is a matter of taste. Generally, Config attributes are mostly for 
> remote access and have request-response semantics, so they’re somewhat 
> negotiable. Notifications are for something one side declares which is not 
> negotiable, and new payloads are hardly ever used.
> 
> Note though, that in the IKE_AUTH exchange, the peer is not yet 
> authenticated. So depending on how sensitive the content of the parameters 
> is, you might not want to send it at that point. The IKE SA at that point 
> protects against passive eavesdropping and message modification only.
> 
> Yoav
> 
>> On May 20, 2015, at 3:13 PM, Frederic Detienne (fdetienn) 
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> we would like to implement new vendor specific capabilities under IKEv2. 
>> This capability requires argument passing. These arguments should be 
>> protected (encrypted and signed).
>> 
>> We were wondering what was the cleanest way to do this.
>> 
>> What seemed the most logical is
>> 
>> 1- negotiating capability in message 1/2 via a Vendor-ID payload
>> 2- if both peers support capability, exchange parameters via Notify Payloads 
>> in message 3/4 or later
>> 
>> We were considering using configuration attributes instead of Notify Payload 
>> but we are not sure this is an adequate message type.
>> 
>> Can someone give us an advice ?
>> 
>> thanks,
>> 
>>    Frederic Detienne
>> _______________________________________________
>> IPsec mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
> 

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

Reply via email to