Toerless Eckert <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> The people in the line behind me did not agree.

    > Hmm... Don't remember if anyone else stated that there can be one one
    > keypair. As i said in the other mail, both a single and a douple
    > keypair solution are possible to build, i just think it would be nicer

It's not about keypair, it's about what IPsec would call the SPD, which is a
way to select which traffic goes into which tunnel.  I would also have
expected it to be able to select based upon VLAN tag and destination ethernet
type, but people said that wasn't so.

I would love to be told I'm wrong.
I can see if one was building the minimum viable solution that can deal with
state-level attackers on point to point fiber runs, that just encrypting
everything works well.  

    > if ACP can be separately encrypted from data-plane, but as long as ACP
    > is responsible to manage the encryption key, it can equally encrypt
    > both ACP and data-plane. Its just that right now, ACP is not optimized
    > for fast reconvergence, so a data-plane could converge faster and then
    > it might still need to wait for ACP. But thats solely a matter of
    > routing protocol and aliveness parameters of ACP/data-plane.


-- 
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima

Reply via email to