+1
Anybody who starts implementing IKEv2 in a few months using the new RFC should
not have to care about the history, and which notify type was added at which
point, except to know that some implementations in the field may not support
these newer notifications.
-Original Message-
To clarify, I was only referring to the notifications defined in -bis. Not in
any other documents.
-Original Message-
From: Valery Smyslov [mailto:sva...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 9:35
To: Yaron Sheffer; Paul Hoffman; Tero Kivinen; ipsec@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [IPsec]
At 8:57 AM +0200 1/19/10, Yaron Sheffer wrote:
I agree with Tero, regardless of the discussion we had on where to put the
tables etc., the document needs to be internally consistent. So we should add
the new notify types that we're defining in *this* document to the notify
types table. Luckily
Hi,
I also agree with Tero and Yaron. It's better to have all defined
notifications listed in one table.
In this case the paragraph immediately preceeding the table must be changed
from:
The values in the following table are only current as of the
publication date of RFC 4306. Other
