9 4:49 AM
>To: Grewal, Ken
>Cc: ipsec@ietf.org
>Subject: [IPsec] Issue #90: Shorter WESP negotiation
>
>Grewal, Ken writes:
>> In the current traffic visibility draft, we indicate that WESP can be
>> negotiated via IKEv2 using a new protocol identifier.
>> Charlie
Grewal, Ken writes:
> In the current traffic visibility draft, we indicate that WESP can be
> negotiated via IKEv2 using a new protocol identifier.
> Charlie Kaufman suggested that it may be plausible to use a notification
> method along the lines of USE_TRANSPORT_MODE in RFC 4306, where the type
om: ipsec-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ipsec-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
>Yoav Nir
>Sent: Saturday, May 02, 2009 2:41 PM
>To: Grewal, Ken; ipsec@ietf.org
>Subject: Re: [IPsec] Issue #90: Shorter WESP negotiation
>
>Grewal, Ken wrote:
>>
>> Issue #90: shorter WESP negotiation
&g
Grewal, Ken wrote:
>
> Issue #90: shorter WESP negotiation
>
> In the current traffic visibility draft, we indicate that WESP can be
> negotiated via IKEv2 using a new protocol identifier.
> Charlie Kaufman suggested that it may be plausible to use a notification
> method along the lines of USE_TR
All,
As we prepare to submit the next revision of the WESP draft, we wanted to
get some discussion / feedback on some open ticket items.
Issue #90: shorter WESP negotiation
In the current traffic visibility draft, we indicate that WESP can be
negotiated via IKEv2 using a new protocol identifier.
