Still might be worth a document proposing some profile, even if it does not match current practice.
On Sep 24, 2013, at 9:12 PM, Yaron Sheffer <yaronf.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'll defer to Paul on this one. > > Thanks, > Yaron > > On 09/24/2013 05:00 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote: >> <no hat> >> >> On Sep 24, 2013, at 4:21 AM, Tero Kivinen <kivi...@iki.fi> wrote: >> >>> Yaron Sheffer writes: >>>> I just reread the introduction of RFC 4945 and I don't understand its >>>> purpose. So I'm not sure it should be referenced from 5996bis. >>> >>> Ok, if there is any disagreement about it, then I think it is better >>> to leave it out from 5996bis. >> >> Please do not. It is flawed, but it is the best we have. If you leave it >> out, then you will have to reproduce all the valuable matching bits in >> 5996bis. That's possible, but likely more work than you expect. >> _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
