In your previous mail you wrote:
Basically, I don't have a problem with your suggestion, but I have a
couple of questions:
1. Isn't the notion of "traffic selector" specific to IKEv2? If so,
should we explicitly say IKEv2 in the example?
=> the term is but not the notion. In fact the notion is from the
architecture (RFC 2401) when SPD (Security Policy Database) entries
are described. IMHO this is a good example of what the proper terminology
can give, so why sulk it?
2. I'm not sure if "a traffic selector of a security association" is
the accurate wording.
=> there are many possible addresses related to a security association
(1 to 4 in RFC 2401, IKE and PF_KEY) so we need to be as accurate as
possible.
If we really want to use the notion of
"traffic selector", shouldn't we rather simply say "traffic
selector" (without security association)?
=> I don't know. Of course this is not ambiguous for me...
Perhaps it is time to get an advice from our security area director?
Thanks
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
