At 12:03 PM +0200 12/1/09, Tero Kivinen wrote: >Dan Harkins writes: >> Groups 1 and 2 were defined in RFC 2409 and repeating them in a >> subsequent RFC does not change that. > >RFC2409 has been obsoleted, so I do not want to refer to that, as >people will then go to the RFC2409 and notice that it has been >obsoleted by RFC4306, and will go to there and find the groups from >RFC4306 appendix B.1 and B.2.
Fully agree. It does not matter where something was defined first. >I am NOT going to touch ipsec-registry. That is IKEv1 stuff that is >already obsoleted, and there is no point of doing anything for that >(and no need, as it does nto have range allocations). > >I am talking about IKEv2 registry >(http://www.iana.org/assignments/ikev2-parameters) and there the >references were already for RFC4306, not to RFC2409 (and it does not >have groups 3 and 4 at all, those are not defined for IKEv2). There may be a good reason for someone to touch the IKEv1 registry, but that should be done as a separate work item. --Paul Hoffman, Director --VPN Consortium _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
