> >> I would prefer no notify if the request was fulfilled and to only send a > >> notify if a request could not be > fulfilled. > >> Since clients can ask for both that should cover things. If a client isn’t > >> asking for ipvX, I see no need to > answer > >> that ipvX is supported too. > > > > That would make sending these notifies dependent on the content of request. > > So, the tradeoff is whether saving eight bytes justifies complication of > > state machine. > > I wouldn't call that complicated the state machine. You are not adding > new states or transitions, and you already keep a list of received > payloads for this state/exchange I hope :P
True, I wasn't precise enough. The complication is that in the current approach the responder sends these notifications blindly, sending them doesn't depend on the content of CP request. Regards, Valery. > Paul _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
