Hi William,
Hi,
I’ve read the threads, and to avoid the long email page I try to summarize my
opinions below.
1. I also support making this document Informational or Experimental.
2. Through the discussions, I feel that even IPsec experts will have
inconsistencies and ambiguities in their understanding of the reasons currently
defined. Without clear definition and consistent understanding, this delete
reason hint may be misguiding. I suggest that we summarize the common
situations/reasons of the SA deletion, and give more details about these
situations, i.e., explaining the delete reasons better, to ensure everyone
having the same understanding.
I would suggest to add a “Related SPI” that would specify the SPI of
the SA that somehow caused this SA to be deleted.
This would be really helpful for INITIAL_CONTACT reason.
3. Regarding the “Delete Reason Text”, I have no concern with the language
issue, because it’s only a hint, and you can use it if you understand it and
ignore it if you don’t. But my concern is what if you can understand the text
but it is inconsistent with the “Delete Reason Type”, then which one should be
considered true. So my suggestion is to not have this text field in the first
available version, or to make it optional and not use it when a specific delete
reason type is given. I.e., we should use the “Delete Reason Type” as much as
possible.
I would also add that if this field is left, then the issues with its
language must be addressed.
In particular, a compliance with BCP18 is needed.
Regards,
Valery.
Regards & Thanks！
Wei PAN (潘伟)
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list -- ipsec@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ipsec-le...@ietf.org
