>  >
>  So, in fact, WESP is not an optional encapsulation of ESP.  It is an
>  alternative to ESP with some duplicated fields (such as Next Header)
>  and pointers into the actual integrity-protected payload.
>

Actually, the name "Wrapped ESP" (WESP) is a misnomer. :)

It may have been envisaged as a wrapper over ESP, but given how it has
evolved (computing ICV, etc) , its more than just a mere wrapper and
is actually an alternative to ESP (as you rightly point out). However,
i see no issues with this. In fact, i see this as another reason why
the spec should allow WESP to be used for encryption also.

Jack
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec

Reply via email to