Steffen Klassert <steffen.klass...@secunet.com> wrote:
> at the last working group meeting in London, it was quite some interest
> to work on a re-design of ESP to make it fit to the multi-cpu case, QoS
> classes, HW offloads etc.
I agree with your idea in the subject, of a virtual interim on this.
>
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ponchon-ipsecme-anti-replay-subspaces-00.txt
While there is a problem space section in this document, I found it a bit
inadequate.
I think that it is important to collect all of the challenges into a single
set of goals.
> The Google PSP Security Protocol (PSP) is another new 'ESP like'
> protocol. There is some interest to standardize PSP, so the issues that
> are solved there should also be considered when designing a new ESP
> version. Most concepts that are used in PSP are taken from IPsec ESP,
> so IMO this should be integrated into the IPsec protocol suite.
It would be great to have the problems/challenges that this aims to solve, as
well as the RAVSI concepts there too.
> - What are the problems to solve?
Let's get consensus on this aspect first. Maybe there are things that we
might agree are out-of-scope, or are really implementation specific issues.
That might mean a document be written, and the WG do a consensus call.
> - How should the problems be solved?
> Please let me know if there is interest,
Thank you for bringing this up.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
