Yoav Nir writes:
> Hi all.
>
> There are only three issues this time, because this is the last batch.
>
> Issue #173 - Trigger packets should not be required
> ===
> In a few places in the new section 2.23.1 in IKEv2bis, it says that one
> must ha
Syed Ajim Hussain writes:
>Thanks for your quick response. I think, instead of user takes special
>care by adding extra Rule to allow un-encrypted ND traffic(unicast) ,
>There should be some RFC guidelines, such that IPSEC/IKE protocol itself
>can take care. It will be problem i
Pasi,
(Adding the working group mailing list to the discussion; previous
discussion has been at i...@ietf.org.)
You're right that implementing a "weak shared secret" EAP method (both
the EAP peer and EAP server roles) on both IPsec nodes, combined with
the "EAP mutual authentication" work ite
At 1:10 PM +0200 2/19/10, Tero Kivinen wrote:
>Yoav Nir writes:
>> Hi all.
>>
>> There are only three issues this time, because this is the last batch.
>>
> > Issue #173 - Trigger packets should not be required
>> ===
>> In a few places in the new sec
Am reading this right?
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 08:22:51AM -0800, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> At 1:10 PM +0200 2/19/10, Tero Kivinen wrote:
> >Yoav Nir writes:
> >> Hi all.
> >>
> >> There are only three issues this time, because this is the last batch.
> >>
> > > Issue #173 - Trigger packets should not
