At 10:55 AM -0800 12/15/09, Paul Hoffman wrote: >Section 1.4.1 says: Normally, the reply in the INFORMATIONAL exchange will >contain delete payloads for the paired SAs going in the other direction. There >is one exception. If by chance both ends of a set of SAs independently decide >to close them, each may send a delete payload and the two requests may cross >in the network. > >But, Section 4 (conformance requirements), says: Every implementation MUST be >capable of responding to an INFORMATIONAL exchange, but a minimal >implementation MAY respond to any INFORMATIONAL message with an empty >INFORMATIONAL reply. > >What should we do? Changing the conformance requirement is pretty serious, but >not telling the other side that you understand the Delete is also serious.
>From the discussion so far, I am inclined to leave the text as-is. Tero is >correct that a really minimal implementation might make the other side not >understand that it is minimal, but it is still conformant. --Paul Hoffman, Director --VPN Consortium _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
