Re: I-D ACTION:draft-tschofenig-v6ops-secure-tunnels-00.txt (fwd)

[Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>]

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> IMHO it is a bit 'late' to start securing proto-41. It has been in use
> already for too long and by too many people.

Just to be clear, this document doesn't intend to say, "OK, let's use 
IPsec for proto-41, and forget the unsecured version".  It's just 
trying to describe the scenarios and IPsec mechanisms which *could* be 
used for securing. :)
 
> Thus this memo does have a good value for people who want to secure it
> afterall, but I don't think that it will actually happen a lot due to
> the above three items.

I would be (pleasantly) surprised if it happened to a very large 
degree, but you never know. :)

In any case, this kind of document (or IPsec description in general) 
was required by the IESG for going forward with 
draft-ietf-v6ops-mech-v2.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings