On Fri, 17 Jan 2014, Valery Smyslov wrote:
I don't think this complicates the state machine that much, as it's
clearly distinct by the auth type none payload. My preference is for #1.
Thank you for sharing your opinion. I still think that empty
ID is preferrable, as IMHO it will add less complexity to
implementation. I'd still like to know more opinions on this.
Sure. Let's hear from others.
I got your point. But this problem is unrelated to NULL Auth and even
to OE, IMHO. So I don't think it must be addressed in this draft.
Agreed.
By the way, I do prefer the name "auth none" over "auth null". To me,
'null' embodies more of an error condition.
My reasons for selecting this name were the folowing.
First, we define new Authentication Method in IANA. A method
is some essence, that defines how authentication has to be done.
For me "NONE authentication" implies that this essence doesn't
exist at all, while "NULL authentication" implies that this essence
(authentication) exists, but performs no real action (is dummy).
For me is sounds a bit better, as we define an essence in IANA.
And second, I had a similar example - NULL Encryption Algorithm
in ESP. For some reason it was named NULL, not NONE,
so I just decided to follow this tradition.
I figured that was the reason. Although I think in the ESP case
there is an NO-OP encryption with the name NULL. Here I think
we have "no authentication", not an "authentication with null"
Disclaimer: english is not my native language, so my
arguments for the naming may look a bit silly.
The same disclaimer applies to me. So I would also like to hear
from others on this issue. Regardless, it is not a big deal for
me.
Paul
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
IPsec@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
