> MUST either offer no integrity algorithm or a single integrity algorithm of "none" > > Does anyone have a problem with this new wording?
I suggest we specify that one or the other as the preferred approach. Maybe add an additional sentence saying SHOULD for no transform and MAY for transform=none? Scott Moonen (smoo...@us.ibm.com) z/OS Communications Server TCP/IP Development http://www.linkedin.com/in/smoonen From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoff...@vpnc.org> To: Tero Kivinen <kivi...@iki.fi> Cc: IPsecme WG <ipsec@ietf.org> Date: 11/25/2009 11:31 AM Subject: Re: [IPsec] #122: Integrity proposals with combined algorithms At 3:04 PM +0200 11/25/09, Tero Kivinen wrote: > > Are people OK with wording that says "MUST either offer an integrity > > algorithm or a single integrity algorithm of 'none'"? > >If you add "no" somewhere there (i.e. MUST either offer no integrity >algorithm...) then I can accept it. Er, right. MUST either offer no integrity algorithm or a single integrity algorithm of "none" Does anyone have a problem with this new wording? --Paul Hoffman, Director --VPN Consortium _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
_______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
