Subject: RE: ICIM: comment on IPsecPolicyGroup

From: Jay Wack <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 09:04:04 -0500

ANSI has a very broad approach X9.69 called Key Management Extensions...you
may want to take a look.

Jay Wack: CTO Tecsec  703 506 9069 x112

-----Original Message-----
From: Ricky Charlet [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 7:38 PM
To: .ipsec-policy
Subject: ICIM: comment on IPsecPolicyGroup

Howdy,

	IPsecPolciyGroup binds together an IKERule and and IPsecRule. I'd
like
to see a layer of abstraction introduced, namely a KeyManagementRule.
Then under keyManagementRule, we could use IKE for KM services if we
wanted, but we could also use kerberose, or son-of-ike or manually
entered keys, or....

-- 
  Ricky Charlet   : Redcreek Communications   : usa (510) 795-6903

---

From: Jon Saperia <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 07:12:37 -0500

See below:

This is all very good since I see a clear mapping with this approach to
the approach we are using in the SNMP Policy (CONF) area.  Specifically
we can say that a service (keyManagment) might need several technogoies
to be realized or could, depending on circumstance use different ones.
/jon

> wanted, but we could also use kerberose, or son-of-ike or manually

Thanks,
/jon
--

Jon Saperia		     [email-masked]
			     Phone: 617-744-1079
			     Fax:   617-249-0874
			     http://www.jdscons.com/