Re: [IPsec] One answer to sec 2.5 question about payloads in order

[Yoav Nir <ynir at checkpoint.com>]

On Sep 10, 2008, at 5:35 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote:

> At 10:00 PM -0400 9/9/08, Dan McDonald wrote:
>> In section 2.5, there is this:
>>
>>   NOTE TO IMPLEMENTERS: Does anyone require that the payloads be in  
>> the
>>   order shown in the figures in Section 2?  Can we eliminate the
>>   requirement in the following paragraph?  If not, we will probably
>>   have to add a new appendix with the order, but there is no reason  
>> to
>>   do that if no one actually cares. {{ Remove this paragraph before  
>> the
>>   document is finalized, of course. }}
>>
>> I don't think having the payloads in a specific order is going to  
>> present a
>> problem.  Just as long as we have a clear direction on what to do  
>> in the
>> presence of malformed payloads (e.g. Two instances of an IDi  
>> payload in one
>> packet is an error, right?), and what payloads MUST/SHOULD/MAY be  
>> there, I
>> think we're in okay shape.
>>
>> I didn't see any previous e-mails on this, but I may have missed  
>> someone else
>> chiming in.
>
> You did not. Other chiming is appreciated.

I thought I did, and no, I don't care about the order of the payloads.
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
IPsec at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec