RE: ICIM: comment on IPsecPolicyGroup

["Jason, Jamie" <jamie.jason@xxxxxxxxx>]

I believe we talked about this in San Diego and I agree that it would be
prudent that we derive the IKERule class from an intermediate that would be
something like you describe.

A small correction - IPsecPolicyGroup binds together a set of IKERules and a
set of IPsecRules (thus the * cardinality on each).

Jamie

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ricky Charlet [mailto:rcharlet@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 4:38 PM
> To: .ipsec-policy
> Subject: ICIM: comment on IPsecPolicyGroup
> 
> 
> Howdy,
> 
> 	IPsecPolciyGroup binds together an IKERule and and 
> IPsecRule. I'd like
> to see a layer of abstraction introduced, namely a KeyManagementRule.
> Then under keyManagementRule, we could use IKE for KM services if we
> wanted, but we could also use kerberose, or son-of-ike or manually
> entered keys, or....
> 
> -- 
>   Ricky Charlet   : Redcreek Communications   : usa (510) 795-6903
>