[speaking as individual]
On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 9:32 AM Daniel Migault wrote:
> I agree but in my opinion the draft has some scalability limitation and to
> be useful needs to be combined with something else
>
That is not true. Perhaps for your use case, but not other people's use
cases, such
Hi Steffen,
I think I mostly agree with you. Please see inline,
Yours,
Daniel
On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 1:36 AM Steffen Klassert <
steffen.klass...@secunet.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 04:58:55PM -0500, Daniel Migault wrote:
> > This draft is missing an important part which is the actua
On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 04:58:55PM -0500, Daniel Migault wrote:
> This draft is missing an important part which is the actual negotiation
> of the multiple SAs. A peer willing to set these multiple SAs will have to
> negotiate them anyway. Some implementations can
> handle parallel CREATE_CHILD_SA
inen
> > Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2022 1:35 AM
> > To: ipsec@ietf.org
> > Subject: [IPsec] IPsecME WG Adoption call for
> > draft-pwouters-ipsecme-multi-sa-performance
> >
> > This is two week working group adoption call for the
> > draft-pwouters
Hi,
I've read this draft and support the adoption.
Regards & Thanks!
Wei PAN (潘伟)
> -Original Message-
> From: IPsec On Behalf Of Tero Kivinen
> Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2022 1:35 AM
> To: ipsec@ietf.org
> Subject: [IPsec] IPsecME WG Adoption call for
> d
Paul Wouters writes:
On Thu, 10 Nov 2022, Pierre Pfister (ppfister) wrote:
Since I doubt the working group would have the time and energy to work on two
different solutions, my support to this draft's adoption is conditioned to
whether the authors plan to consider addressing our concerns lis
Paul Wouters wrote:
> I think this solution is such a small solution and already has running
> code, that I would prefer the WG to quickly move this on, while also
> beginning a separate discussion on how to do various different scaling
I think that the multi-SA stuff should be reall
On Thu, 10 Nov 2022, Pierre Pfister (ppfister) wrote:
Since I doubt the working group would have the time and energy to work on two
different solutions, my support to this draft's adoption is conditioned to
whether the authors plan to consider addressing our concerns listed above.
Speaking w
Hello,
I believe the working group should work on IPsec performance and scalability
issues.
I agree with most of what is stated in the draft, but also have concerns about
the scalability of the proposed solution.
In draft-ponchon-ipsecme-anti-replay-subspaces-00, we tried to extend the
problem
HI,
I read the document and I support its adoption as a starting point.
I'm ready to review and to contribute (we have implemented
similar functionality).
Regards,
Valery.
> This is two week working group adoption call for the
> draft-pwouters-ipsecme-multi-sa-performance. If you support adopti
This is two week working group adoption call for the
draft-pwouters-ipsecme-multi-sa-performance. If you support adoption
of this document to the IPsecME WG send email to the list before the
2022-11-24.
Note, that this is starting point for the document, so if you have any
comments send them to li
11 matches
Mail list logo
