|
|||||||||||
|
Re: [Hipsec] next steps/issues in interopability testing
From: Rob Austein <sra+hip(at)hactrn.net>
Date: Wed Mar 26 2003 - 16:31:17 EST
At Sun, 23 Mar 2003 08:42:26 +0200, Pekka Nikander wrote:
This is probably not quite the right way to think about it. While I understand the temptation, in practice this is the sort of shortcut that ends up taking longer. Alternative suggestion: design #2 to suit HIP's precise needs, post it as an individual I-D, ask for public review, and see what happens. If it seems to be taking a while for the I-D to get traction, post a second draft explaining how to retrofit what HIP needs into some least-bad existing RR type. The point here is that you should at least attempt to design for the success case, rather than starting with a kludge on the assumption that you will fail :). Hipsec mailing list Hipsec@lists.freeswan.org http://lists.freeswan.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec Received on Wed Mar 26 16:55:46 2003 This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Aug 23 2006 - 12:59:58 EDT |
||||||||||
|
|||||||||||