Re: Name canon/secure name service (Re: kink-09)

At Tue, 13 Sep 2005 14:02:41 -0400,
Ken Raeburn <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > I don't think this is a KINK/Kerberos specific matter, though.
> 
> No, it isn't.  How would a non-Kerberos IPsec deployment deal with  
> such a case?

In IKEv1 implementations for example, I believe they have the mapping
between phase1 IDs and selectors in their (local) configuration.
But I don't know how they manage about dynamic case, say road-worrier.

-- 
KAMADA Ken'ichi <[email protected]>