From owner-freebsd-security Fri May 29 07:54:21 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA26852 for freebsd-security-outgoing; Fri, 29 May 1998 07:54:21 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from gateman.zeus.leitch.com (gateman.zeus.leitch.com [204.187.61.193]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id HAA26768 for ; Fri, 29 May 1998 07:54:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from woods@tap.zeus.leitch.com) Received: from zeus.leitch.com (tap.zeus.leitch.com [204.187.61.10]) by gateman.zeus.leitch.com (8.8.5/8.7.3/1.0) with ESMTP id KAA12201 for ; Fri, 29 May 1998 10:53:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from brain.zeus.leitch.com (brain.zeus.leitch.com [204.187.61.32]) by zeus.leitch.com (8.7.5/8.7.3/1.0) with ESMTP id KAA21194 for ; Fri, 29 May 1998 10:53:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from woods@localhost) by brain.zeus.leitch.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA11914; Fri, 29 May 1998 10:53:51 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from woods@tap.zeus.leitch.com) Date: Fri, 29 May 1998 10:53:51 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199805291453.KAA11914@brain.zeus.leitch.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: woods@zeus.leitch.com (Greg A. Woods) To: freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: SKIP problems In-Reply-To: Angelos D. Keromytis's message of "Thu, May 28, 1998 15:47:00 -0400" regarding "Re: SKIP problems " id <199805281947.PAA26621@adk.gr> References: <199805281840.LAA00771@dingo.cdrom.com> <199805281947.PAA26621@adk.gr> X-Mailer: VM 6.45 under Emacs 20.2.1 Reply-To: freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Organization: Planix, Inc.; Toronto, Ontario; Canada Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk [ On Thu, May 28, 1998 at 15:47:00 (-0400), Angelos D. Keromytis wrote: ] > Subject: Re: SKIP problems > > Not that many platforms use SKIP. IPsec is the IP security standard, > and not SKIP. "may become" ;-) (So far as I can see it's just a set of out-dated RFCs that will hopefully be replaced by an updated set (currently in draft status) in the future, and though it's on the standards track as I understand it, there's a fair distance to go before it's written in the hardest stone the IETF writes anything in.) > No point supporting a bad standard-wannabe. Well, that depends entirely on the relative merits of the respective "standard" and non-standard technologies. I sure would support moving a non-standard into the standards track if it is superior to the currently proffered "standard". Not that I want to make any technical appraisals on the pros and cons of any of the topics being discussed here -- I'm just trying to figure out all of this stuff too, and it makes me seriously mad when companies with money to burn start pushing things by making untrue claims about them, which is exactly what I've been seeing w.r.t. IPsec and ISAKMP. I think this particular topic is far more too important to make a VHS/BETA example out of it. -- Greg A. Woods +1 416 443-1734 VE3TCP Planix, Inc. ; Secrets of the Weird To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe security" in the body of the message