Hi ipsecme,
An open issue we have for IPTFS is the use of transport mode.
During the last face-to-face IETF meeting transport mode was mentioned, and my
response had been that transport mode was less secure than non-TFS tunnel mode
as the IP header was leaking user information so it hadn't be
Christian Hopps wrote:
> non-TFS tunnel mode as the IP header was leaking user information so it
> hadn't been a consideration for us; however, it was later pointed out
> (by Paul W. I believe), that transport mode is (unfortunately?)
> commonly used with GRE tunnels in lieu of IP
> On May 3, 2020, at 1:08 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
>
> Christian Hopps wrote:
>> non-TFS tunnel mode as the IP header was leaking user information so it
>> hadn't been a consideration for us; however, it was later pointed out
>> (by Paul W. I believe), that transport mode is (unfortun
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 10:54:26PM +0300, Yoav Nir wrote:
> [With chair hat on]
>
> Yes, the charter says that we are to make a guidance document. If the working
> group feels that it’s better to put the specification and guidance in a
> single document, we can work on that and clear it with the
On Sun, 3 May 2020, Christian Hopps wrote:
An open issue we have for IPTFS is the use of transport mode.
During the last face-to-face IETF meeting transport mode was mentioned, and
my response had been that transport mode was less secure than non-TFS tunnel
mode as the IP header was leaking u
Hi Ben,
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 10:54:26PM +0300, Yoav Nir wrote:
> > [With chair hat on]
> >
> > Yes, the charter says that we are to make a guidance document. If the
> working group feels that it’s better to put the specification and guidance in
> a
> single document, we can work on that and
