[MEXT] IPsec vs other

To: mext <mext at ietf.org>
Subject: [MEXT] IPsec vs other
From: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu at gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 00:22:43 +0100
Delivered-to: mext at core3.amsl.com
List-archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mext>
List-help: <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG <mext.ietf.org>
List-post: <mailto:mext@ietf.org>
List-subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302)

IPsec is a big thing. Why not having just its AH as a MUST, beforeproposing big alternatives to big IPsec.


Alex

Follow-Ups:
- [MEXT] RFC3775bis: BU de-registration
  - From: QIU Ying
- Re: [MEXT] IPsec vs other
  - From: QIU Ying