RE: transport mode document as WG item
Tarique Mustafa <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.mobike |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi Francis & Atul, As a new-comer I have been silently following this particular trail of discussions. I absolutely agree that the implications of address change are far deeper - even may be bit more complicated - in Transport mode than in Tunnel mode. As such, it may need a better re-conciliation with IPSec architecture. Regards, -Tarique Mustafa [email protected] wrote: Hi Francis, Yes. I agree that an implication of handling the transport case would be a more integrated MOBIKE (with IPsec Architecture). Best Regards, Atul > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 6:00 PM > To: Sharma Atul (Nokia-ES/Boston) > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Mobike] transport mode document as WG item > > case. So, thinking out loud, as far as MOBIKE is concerned > the mechanism > should be similar whether we are using tunnel or transport mode? > > => no, changing an address in transport mode implies far more than > in tunnel mode: MOBIKE must be integrated into the whole > IPsec architecture. > We can specify something specific for transport mode, my > proposal is to > put transport mode outside the scope of MOBIKE for the moment. > _______________________________________________ Mobike mailing list [email protected] https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! _______________________________________________ Mobike mailing list [email protected] https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike