Re: threats ID

[Brian E Carpenter <brc@zurich.ibm.com>]

Can everybody please close this thread, because it is not
advancing our WG's business?

Thanks

    Brian

Masataka Ohta wrote:
> 
> Ayyasamy, Senthilkumar;
> 
> >>>So in some meaningful sense, IPSEC is above the IP layer,
> >>>even if there is a document telling us that we're not supposed to
> >>>think about it that way.
> >>
> >>Hugh? Your point was not technical but lack of IETF consensus.
> 
> > ok.
> 
> So, you are wrong, completely.
> 
> > Can you provide a citation (RFC) which illustrates your
> > statement:
> >
> >    > There is no such thing as layer 3.5.
> >    > Network layer solutions are at layer 3,
> >    > transport layer solutions are at layer 4.
> >    > PERIOD
> 
> You should ask it Brian, because he said 3.5 first.
> 
> But, I recommend you do it privately. No carbon copying to me
> is necessary.
> 
> > As another example, transport advertises that it is ECN enabled
> > but congestion notification is given by the routers at network
> > level.
> 
> That's perfectly fine layering.
> 
> Are you saying so, or are you saying you are not sure?
> 
>                                                 Masataka Ohta

-- 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Brian E Carpenter 
Distinguished Engineer, Internet Standards & Technology, IBM