[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 ]
Jan Zorz @ go6.si
jan at go6.si
Tue Jul 26 18:04:31 CEST 2011
On 7/26/11 3:44 PM, Ole Troan wrote: >>> My suggestion would be to add (in addition to RFC6204 in >>> mandatory): >>> >>> "If this specification is used for business class CPE, then >>> IPsec-v2 [RFC2401, RFC2406, RFC2402], IKE version 2 (IKEv2) >>> [RFC4306, RFC4718] and ISAKMP [RFC2407, RFC2408, RFC2409] must be >>> supported in addition to RFC6204 requirements" >> >> Any opinions from the WG on this? Otherwise I would add this to the >> spec. >> >> Ole? > > on the fence, but if I had to fall down on one side I think its OK. > perhaps a should? it really depends on the deployment. not all > business deployments require VPNs. which presume is what is the > underlaying reason for requiring this? Ole, thnx for kicking in... So, did you mean something like this in Optional section: "If this specification is used for business class CPE, then it is highly recommended, that IPsec-v2 [RFC2401, RFC2406, RFC2402], IKE version 2 (IKEv2) [RFC4306, RFC4718] and ISAKMP [RFC2407, RFC2408, RFC2409] are unconditionally required in addition to RFC6204 requirements" Would that work? What others think? Cheers, Jan
- 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 ]