Subject: [IPsec] Support for WESP extensions

From: "Sanchez, Mauricio (ProCurve)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2009 06:53:08 +0000

I hereby voice support for WESP extensions draft (in response to email noted below).

My answers to questions posed:

- If this proposal is accepted as a WG work item, are you committing to review multiple versions of the draft?

Yes.

- Are you willing to contribute text to the draft?

Yes, as part of review process.

- Would you like to co-author it?

No.

Cheers,

MS

--------------------------------------------
Mauricio Sanchez
Chief Security Architect

HP ProCurve Networking
Hewlett-Packard
8000 Foothills Blvd.
M/S 5541
Roseville, CA 95747
tel: 916.785.1910
fax: 916.785.1749
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
--------------------------------------------

From: Yaron Sheffer <[email-masked]>

Subject: [IPsec] Proposed work item: WESP extensibility

To: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>

Message-ID:

      <[email-masked]>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

This draft proposes an extensibility framework for WESP, as well as several specific extensions.

Proposed starting point: http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-montenegro-ipsecme-wesp-extensions-00.txt.

Please reply to the list:

- If this proposal is accepted as a WG work item, are you committing to review multiple versions of the draft?

- Are you willing to contribute text to the draft?

- Would you like to co-author it?

Please also reply to the list if:

- You believe this is NOT a reasonable activity for the WG to spend time on.

If this is the case, please explain your position. Do not explore the fine technical details (which will change anyway, once the WG gets hold of the draft); instead explain why this is uninteresting for the WG or for the industry at large. Also, please mark the title clearly (e.g. "DES40-export in IPsec - NO!").