Re: issue 6: scope of SA changes

 
> 
> Lets have a consensus call on this. From the list
> discussion so far I don't see enough people commenting
> on this that would enable us to make decision. For
> a more accurate decision, I have broken the issue down
> into three questions.
> 
> 1. Would it be useful to treat different flows or applications
>     in a different manner with regards to their multihoming
>     behaviour? For instance, keep one flow always in GPRS
>     but allow another flow to use LAN where available.
> 
>     Yes, mandatory [ ]
>     Yes, optional  [ X]
>     No             [ ]
> 
> 2. Would you like to provide this functionality through
> 
>     Separate IPsec SAs and their independent addresses   [ ]
>     Separate IKE SAs and their independent addresses     [X ]
> 
I don't understand completely (all the consequences) as to what it means to
keep some IPsec SAs at the old address while the IKE SA moves to
the new address. So, i would like to keep it simple for now.

-mohan


> 3. If you prefer the use of IPsec SAs for this purpose,
>     would you like
> 
>     always manage each SA separately           [ ]
>     provide a default where all SAs are moved  [ ]
> 
> Send your answers by Wednesday, Nov 3rd, 2004. The rationale
> behind your answers will help others form their opinions, so
> please state also why you are answering in a particular way.
> 
> --Jari
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mobike mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.machshav.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mobike