Hi Jeff, On 4/8/16, 10:12 AM, "Jeffrey Haas" <[email protected]> wrote:
>As a followup to mic comment on Friday afternoon of IETF 95, we should >consider an explicit code point for "empty/null" authentication. This >covers the cases where authentication fields in protocols need to be >used, but no mechanism providing authentication is in use. > >BFD, however, has an unusual form of this case: >1. We support the *absence* of authentication. >2. We have work to add an explicit authentication code point with no >authentication, simply to take advantage of some sequencing numbers in >the authentication field. I reviewed RFC 5880 and I guess what is gained from the key-chain entry are the send and accept lifetimes for this usage. The precise semantics are going to be very application (Keychain user) specific. Thanks, Acee > >-- Jeff > _______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
