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

Re: AD review: draft-ietf-kink-kink [section 1-4]

>>>>> "Shoichi" == Shoichi Sakane <sakane@xxxxxxxx> writes:

    >> Section 4.3:
    >> [**] I need explicit review from the IPsec reviewer of this
    >> section to make sure it is compatible with 2401bis.  IN
    >> addition, any differences between how this works and how IKE
    >> would set up the same SA need to be called out.  It is fine for
    >> there to be differences, but I want to make sure the working
    >> group explicitly decided the differences are a good thing.

    Shoichi> i dont think there are differneces between them.  because
    Shoichi> KINK just carries IKEv1 quick mode.  KINK can establish
    Shoichi> the same SA that IKEv1 do so.  

Section 4.3 calls out a lot of explicit detail.  For example it says
exactly when to add SAs to the SPD, etc.  This detail is presented as
Kink specific.

I am asking for review to confirm that this detail did not conflict
with anything in the IKE spec.  If section 4.3 said to just do what
IKE does, I would not have called it out.

I think section 4.3 is well written and it is good to have.  I just
want to make sure there is not an inconsistency.