Subject: [IPsec] Roadmap -07: two minor and one major comments

From: Yaron Sheffer <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 09:38:41 +0300

5.2.4: [draft-ietf-ipsecme-aes-ctr-ikev2] is used as a reference, 
instead of [ipsecme-2].

6.5 (rfc 4359 on using RSA with ESP/AH): if all of msec goes away, I 
don't see a reason to leave this one in. There's absolutely no reason to 
implement it other than multicast.

Also, per my comment to -06, I still think that Appendix A (req levels 
for RFCs that are *not* algorithms) needs to go:

- It mostly consists of empty space, "optional" and "N/A".
- It adds normative weight to an informative document.
- It is of little use to implementers. People will be reading the 
roadmap doc itself to decide what RFCs they need in their product, based 
on market needs.

Thanks,
	Yaron

---

From: Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 17:38:51 -0700

At 9:38 AM +0300 6/27/10, Yaron Sheffer wrote:
>Also, per my comment to -06, I still think that Appendix A (req levels for RFCs that are *not* algorithms) needs to go:
>
>- It is of little use to implementers. People will be reading the roadmap doc itself to decide what RFCs they need in their product, based on market needs.

Not wearing a hat, I also agree with Yaron about Appendix A. I don't see what an implementer is going to get from reading it.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium