[ipv6-wg] RIPE-501 and IPSEC on CPEs
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] RIPE-501 and IPSEC on CPEs
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] RIPE-501 and IPSEC on CPEs
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Merike Kaeo
merike at doubleshotsecurity.com
Wed Jul 20 21:16:41 CEST 2011
On Jul 20, 2011, at 11:54 AM, Jan Zorz @ go6.si wrote: > On 7/20/11 8:05 PM, S.P.Zeidler wrote: >> Do we -want- to make it optional? I'd call that a step backwards. >> The list is not so that every last ratty device someone dragged off their >> junk heap can fulfil it, after all. > > I feel to agree with this statement... > > what percentage of CPEs we "throw out" if we make this optional? You mean mandatory requirement for IPsec right? How many CPEs would not be compliant if we kept it a mandatory requirement to implement IPsec? While I am a huge proponent of IPsec, I have seen so many TLS implementations take over and more are getting standardized that I am left wondering whether mandating IPsec on paper makes sense realistically. I have zero issues with keeping IPsec as mandatory for hosts but want to play devils advocate for a minute. - merike
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] RIPE-501 and IPSEC on CPEs
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] RIPE-501 and IPSEC on CPEs
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]