On Wed, Jun 7, 2023 at 7:00 AM Acee Lindem <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > I am not sure what to recommend as text here. Removing all IKEv1 > references and > > putting draft-ietf-ipsecme-g-ikev2 there and saying manual keying MUST > NOT be > > used is not a good security recommendation either. > > Let me help you out here. What you are saying that OSPFv3 IPsec could > benefit from > recent key management protocols which are still drafts. That is a cherry-pick of what I am saying. What I said was that the Security Considerations are pointing to specific IKEv1 protocols that are currently obsolete. (note: at the time of writing those protocols were also drafts and/or not widely deployed) We invite you submission of an LSR draft to fill this gap. My IETF volunteer quota is currently full. So instead I recommend you discuss with the WG if someone else is willing to make this much needed update for the WG. > I don’t see how this can be considered a DISCUSS on these > SRv6 OSPFv3 extensions. I have answered this a few minutes ago in my previous email. IMO, this DISCUSS is frivolous and should be cleared immediately. > Please (re)read BCP54. Paul
_______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
