Valery: I react to one response now. I'll look at the rest later.
>> IKEv2 implementers that have no need for group security associations are not >> likely to read this document. For this reason, I think it is unwise to >> include the >> updates to RFC 7296 here that: >> >> (1) Rename transform type 5 from "Extended Sequence Numbers (ESN)" to >> "Anti-Replay Protection (ARP)"; and >> >> (2) Rename IKEv2 authentication method 0 from "Reserved" to "NONE". > > These actions don't change bits on the wire and the semantics of the > currently defined values - > implementers who only read RFC 7296 and implement IKEv2 accordingly will get > compliant implementations. You are missing my point. Some yet-to-be written RFC will use the new terminology. That will confuse an implementer. It is a very small part of this document, and I think it belongs in a more mainstream location for the IPsec implementer. Russ _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list -- ipsec@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to ipsec-le...@ietf.org
