Earlier, Dan Harkins wrote, in part: > Honestly, if a WG is not paying attention to RFC 4301, > then what makes you think they're gonna pay attention > to a random individual submission ? > > I don't have any particular love for AH but this effort > is really lacking in one thing: a problem to solve. > > On the one hand, we're being told that the effort is > necessary because WGs developing a "standard for protocol foo" > need to be instructed on how to obtain integrity protection, > but we're also being told that discouraging AH is OK > because no one (in NANOG) is using it and it's a MAY anyway. > > These seem to be somewhat contradictory to me -- > either no one's using it and we have a solution > in search of a problem; > or, someone's using it and it would probably be a problem > to restrict its use in the future.
+1 _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
