Re: Last Call: Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol to Proposed Standard

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Last Call: Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol to Proposed Standard

To: "Howard C. Berkowitz" <hcb at clark.net>
Subject: Re: Last Call: Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol to Proposed Standard
From: Stephen Kent <kent at bbn.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 10:36:55 -0500
Cc: ietf at ns.ietf.org
Delivery-date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 11:03:07 -0500
In-reply-to: <v03007802b146019564cb@[142.154.136.3]>
References: <35207D29.4E146A86@erols.com> <199803310056.TAA04910@thunk.orchard.arlington.ma.us>

Howard,

IPsec provides for host-to-host, host-to-gateway, and gateway-to-gateway
modes of use.  In the host-to-host case, the granularity of an SA can be as
fine as a port pair, or as coarse as an IP address pair.  So, many of the
issues you raised are already addressed by the specs.

Steve

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Last Call: Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol to Proposed Standard
  - From: Howard C. Berkowitz

References:
- Re: Last Call: Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol to Proposed Standard
  - From: Alan Blair
- Re: Last Call: Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol to Proposed Standard
  - From: Bill Sommerfeld
- Re: Last Call: Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol to Proposed Standard
  - From: Howard C. Berkowitz

Prev by Date: Re: IETF PGP Key Signing announcement
Next by Date: MBONE FAQ?
Previous by thread: Re: Last Call: Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol to Proposed Standard
Next by thread: Re: Last Call: Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol to Proposed Standard
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.