Title: RE: AH and flow label
Good morning. Having been away from the list for a while, it's not clear to me what (if any) the consensus (and subsequent decision) is regarding inclusion of the IPv6 Flow Label field in the AH ICV. If consensus and a decision were reached, what were/are they? If
Hi Brian and Francis,
Thanks for your comments. I have made some changes to the draft to
address the issues you raised. Let me know if these changes are OK.
* I have removed all references to MD5 in the document.
* I have added a reference to draft-ietf-ipsec-esp-ah-algorithms-02
* I added the
In your previous mail you wrote:
First, changing the algorithm will not affect interoperability. The
generation of the IID is local to each node.
=> so the change should not be a problem if it is justified.
Second, we are attempting to move this document from PS to
DS, so making
I see two issues with making a change to the hash algorithm.
First, changing the algorithm will not affect interoperability. The
generation of the IID is local to each node.
Second, we are attempting to move this document from PS to
DS, so making a gratuitous change to the hash algorithm is not
u
