About RFC 6973, I mean that we have privacy guidelines. RFC 6973 does not talk about ESP. But can we publish a draft saying don't use ESP privacy features for some devices. It is different story if other implementations don't use it also. Then OK.
Ciao Heinrich On Fri, 31 Aug 2018 at 14:05, Zhen Cao <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Heinrich, > > Thanks for your review and comments. See my comments&questions to > confirm inline. > > > I don't know why IETF would publish this document when they have rfc > 6973. > This draft has much content not stated in RFC6973 (which is a general > recommendation) , e.g., overhead analysis /delay/handshake performance > analysis. > > > I want to see some actual performance from a real ESP implementation > where privacy is protected and energy is saved by tweaking the TFC and how > often dummy packet is sent. > > Are you saying that you would like to see more implementation guidance > other than what's been already provided? or do you think the current > recommendations are unreasonable? > > Btw, sharing the implementation code is encouraged but not mandatory > in IETF. We by default trust the authors because they are foremost > responsible for their work (particularly informational ones). > > Best regards, > Zhen > > > > Ciao > > Heinrich > > _______________________________________________ > > Lwip mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip >
_______________________________________________ Lwip mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip
