[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: charter question re IKE changes
Do you think we could cut down on the cross-posting. I think everyone on
ipsra is probably on ipsec as well.
Beauty with out truth is insubstantial.
Truth without beauty is unbearable.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ietf-ipsra@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-ietf-ipsra@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Dan Harkins
> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2000 12:35 PM
> To: Paul Hoffman / VPNC
> Cc: Stephen Kent; ipsec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; ietf-ipsra@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: charter question re IKE changes
> The lack of people implementing good products should not be a
> motivating factor in developing standards. If we all agree on
> how it *could* work then let's promote that.
> I think the market will follow a good solution. I used to love
> teco until someone showed me vi and that love affair lasted
> until someone showed me emacs.
> On Fri, 13 Oct 2000 07:35:20 PDT you wrote
> > At 12:51 PM -0400 10/12/00, Stephen Kent wrote:
> > >Given this perspective, remind me again why knowledgeable folks
> > >prefer passwords, IF we provide them with good software for the
> > >initial certificate issuance process, working from an existing
> > >password database :-)
> > Because we don't. I agree with your perspectives about how
> it *could*
> > work, but that's not what is being delivered. Today's users make
> > choices based on what is available to them today.
> > I also think the market disagrees with you about smart cards. Smart
> > cards are only useful where there are smart card readers.
> They become
> > an obstacle where there are no readers.
> > Again, I fully support the use of certs and wish that more users
> > agreed with me. But they don't, and designing a protocol around a
> > wish that has had plenty of time to come true but hasn't is a good
> > way to design yet another protocol that won't get implemented.
> > --Paul Hoffman, Director
> > --VPN Consortium