Paul Wouters writes:
> On Sun, 15 Dec 2024, Valery Smyslov wrote:
> > So, my question: what term should we use to be aligned with RFC
> > 4301-4303 and to not confuse readers? Perhaps this is a
> > bikeshedding, but an important one.
Oh, my shepherd writeup already mentions this:
2. Was there controversy about particular points, or were there
decisions where the consensus was particularly rough?
Because this is about naming, everybody has their own views what
color the bike shed should be, so there were several proposals for
the new name.
Everybody agreed that old name was bad, and in the end we found
acceptable name.
So now we just need to find acceptable name :-)
> It seems that "replay protection" would be the way to go, with perhaps a
> sentence saying that 431-4304 called this "anti-replay protection" ?
That would be acceptable for me...
--
kivi...@iki.fi
_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list -- ipsec@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ipsec-le...@ietf.org
