This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/

[ipv6-wg] RIPE-501 replacement document - IPsec question to community - we need your input.

• Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] RIPE-501 replacement document - IPsec question to community - we need your input.
• Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] RIPE-501 replacement document - IPsec question to community - we need your input.

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Jan Zorz @ go6.si jan at go6.si
Fri Dec 23 23:16:45 CET 2011

On 12/23/11 5:30 PM, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) wrote:
> Jan,
>
> Let's be realistic (and the best quality of RIPE-501++ is to be
> realistic and 'down to the ground'): very few IPv6-nodes do IPsec...
> So, let's remove this requirement and make it optional (RFC 6434
> clearly shows the path).
>
> Going in holiday mode: do you use SSH or telnet+IPsec ? :-)

I see your point :)

so, +1 for all optional.

What others think?

And additional question: should we request IPsec-v3 or v2?

Cheers, Jan

• Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] RIPE-501 replacement document - IPsec question to community - we need your input.
• Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] RIPE-501 replacement document - IPsec question to community - we need your input.

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

[ ipv6-wg Archives ]