Re: KINK should referenece to IKEv2?

> > In my opinion from reading the minutes at the IETF50 minneapolis,
> > there is no strict reason to change the referenece from IKEv1 to IKEv2
> > because the ISAKMP payload in the KINK is just used to carry a set of
> > IPsec parameters, and Notification Payloads.

> We should have a consensus whether we will discuss KINK based on rfc2401bis
> or rfc2401.

Well I put on a KINK hat, if the KINK specification will conform to
rfc2401bis and if the KINK won't work on the stack based on *RFC2401*,
we won't be happy because it will take long time to deploy the stack
based on rfc2401bis.  so we need to implement a stack based on rfc2401bis
first before we will run a KINK function.

so we can have four choices while researching the difference between
2401bis and RFC2401 from KINK requirement of view:

	1. make a standard base on both rfc2401 and IKEv1.
	2. make a standard base on both rfc2401 and IKEv2.
	3. make a standard base on both 2401bis and IKEv1.
	4. make a standard base on both 2401bis and IKEv2.

I would like #1 then we proceed to #4.