Third issue. Steve
-----Original Message----- From: ipsecme issue tracker [mailto:t...@tools.ietf.org] Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2012 6:57 PM To: yaronf.i...@gmail.com; draft-ietf-ipsecme-p2p-vpn-prob...@tools.ietf.org Subject: [ipsecme] #212: Section 2.2 should be more detailed. #212: Section 2.2 should be more detailed. Suggested Resolution: Expand use case using text supplied by Vishwas Manral of HP. In a simple use case we want hub and spoke topology for say the DC and the branches. This would also be true of ATM's connecting to their DC. However for scalability reasons we would not want all traffic to go through the hub. In the ATM example we could want VoIP session to bypass the DC and have a direct connectivity between themselves. There are multiple other uses cases for the same. These new sessions however are temporary, when compared to permanent branch to hub connections. -- -------------------------+------------------------------------------------- Reporter: | Owner: draft-ietf-ipsecme-p2p-vpn- yaronf.ietf@… | problem@… Type: defect | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: p2p-vpn- | Severity: - problem | Keywords: Resolution: | -------------------------+------------------------------------------------- Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/ipsecme/trac/ticket/212#comment:1> ipsecme <http://tools.ietf.org/ipsecme/> _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
