Regarding the Next Header in section 2, what will be happened if the value of
Next Header is zero (i.e. IPv6 Hop-by-Hop option) and the packet is not
encrypted?
Regards
Qiu Ying
- Original Message -
From: Yaron Sheffer
To: ipsec@ietf.org
Sent: Sunday, July 05, 2009 3:48 AM
Since the zero of next header value is used for HOPOPT already, maybe applying
a new value for this intention is better to avoid the confliction.
Regards
Qiu Ying
- Original Message -
From: QIU Ying
To: Yaron Sheffer ; ipsec@ietf.org
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 3:30 PM
Subj
Thanks Qiu Ying - great observation.
We had originally proposed using a bit from the WESP flags (integrity only) for
differentiating between ESP-encrypted and ESP-NULL traffic, but changed this to
using a value of zero in the next header for efficient encoding, although this
is overloading the
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.
This draft is a work item of the IP Security Maintenance and Extensions Working
Group of the IETF.
Title : IP Security (IPsec) and Internet Key Exchange (IKE)
Document Roadmap
Author(s)
Hi, Ken
Agree that Option 1 is better as it applies lesser new IANA numbers. But in
this case, it seems redundancy to copy the value of Next Header field in the
ESP trailer to here. How about simply setting the value as ESP here? I think it
more meet the original concept of Next Header.
Maybe
