Re: [IPsec] Comments for draft-ietf-ipsecme-labeled-ipsec-04

2021-01-21 Thread Valery Smyslov
Hi Paul, > Again, this was the result of discussion in the WG where you were very > insistent on how to interpret and send TS payloads. So I'm a little > confused about this being an issue now. > > The text above shows how you could implement optional labels, which is > deemed a rare or not neede

Re: [IPsec] Comments for draft-ietf-ipsecme-labeled-ipsec-04

2021-01-21 Thread Paul Wouters
On Thu, 21 Jan 2021, Valery Smyslov wrote: I wonder what's rational behind this restriction. From my point of view zero length TS_SECLABLE can be used to express that using Security Labels is optional. I.e. initiator can include zero length TS_SECLABEL Traffic Selector along with other TS_SECLA

Re: [IPsec] Comments for draft-ietf-ipsecme-labeled-ipsec-04

2021-01-21 Thread Valery Smyslov
Hi Paul, > > First, it's not clear for me why zero length TS_SECLABLE is prohibited. > > The draft currently says > > > > A zero length Security Label MUST NOT be used. If a received TS > > payload contains a TS_TYPE of TS_SECLABEL with a zero length Security > > Label, that specific Traffi

Re: [IPsec] Comments for draft-ietf-ipsecme-labeled-ipsec-04

2021-01-20 Thread Paul Wouters
On Wed, 20 Jan 2021, Valery Smyslov wrote: First, it's not clear for me why zero length TS_SECLABLE is prohibited. The draft currently says A zero length Security Label MUST NOT be used. If a received TS payload contains a TS_TYPE of TS_SECLABEL with a zero length Security Label, that sp