From tardo@tardo.lkg.dec.com Mon Aug 16 22:55:19 1993 Received: from interlock.ans.net by nis.ans.net with SMTP id AA03249 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for <archive-ipsec@nis.ans.net>); Mon, 16 Aug 1993 20:10:35 -0400 Received: from inet-gw-2.pa.dec.com by interlock.ans.net with SMTP id AA04869 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 1.1 for <ipsec@ans.net>); Mon, 16 Aug 1993 19:55:23 -0400 Received: by inet-gw-2.pa.dec.com; id AA02241; Mon, 16 Aug 93 15:55:23 -0700 Received: by tardo.lkg.dec.com (5.65/cgg-100491); id AA10012; Mon, 16 Aug 1993 18:55:19 -0400 Message-Id: <9308162255.AA10012@tardo.lkg.dec.com> To: ipsec@ans.net Cc: tardo@tardo.lkg.dec.com Subject: pointers to documents Date: Mon, 16 Aug 93 18:55:19 -0400 From: tardo@tardo.lkg.dec.com X-Mts: smtp Could someone post the locations for the current drafts? I lost my pointer to SwIPe (sic?) and would like to look over the any outstanding drafts. If these are in internet-drafts, let me know. Thanks, Joe From glenn@sloth.ncsl.nist.gov Wed Aug 18 07:19:59 1993 Received: from interlock.ans.net by nis.ans.net with SMTP id AA14042 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for <archive-ipsec@nis.ans.net>); Wed, 18 Aug 1993 11:20:55 -0400 Received: from SLOTH.NCSL.NIST.GOV by interlock.ans.net with SMTP id AA04182 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 1.1 for <ipsec@ans.net>); Wed, 18 Aug 1993 11:14:51 -0400 Received: by sloth.ncsl.nist.gov (4.1/NIST(rbj/dougm)) id AA17022; Wed, 18 Aug 93 11:19:59 EDT Date: Wed, 18 Aug 93 11:19:59 EDT From: K. Robert Glenn <glenn@sloth.ncsl.nist.gov> Organization: National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Sub-Organization: Computer Systems Laboratory (CSL) Message-Id: <9308181519.AA17022@sloth.ncsl.nist.gov> To: ipsec@ans.net Subject: New NLSP (I-NLSP) Draft forthcomming... Cc: Rob_Glenn<glenn@sloth.ncsl.nist.gov> Hello all, For those of you who don't know, I've been working on providing technical feedback on NLSP (ISO11577) to ISO for the past two years (via NIST's X3S3.3 Rep. Dale Walters). This has been an extremely frustrating, and drawn-out endeavor but it has provided me with a fairly in-depth knowledge on the connectionless portion of the ISO document. Through this e-mail mailing list and long conversations with Richard Colella (a colleague of mine here at NIST that attends the IETF meetings), I've pretty much followed the efforts of this group and your discussions on the problems with NLSP. Several months ago I pondered and suggested to certain individuals that the Internet could benefit from the ISO work, if and only if this document (ISO11577) was more readable (hmmm, where have I seen this before). Well, everyone I talked to agreed that this was a good idea, if only someone had the time to re-write ISO11577, so that it only had the connectionless portions and was more readable. Well, in my spare time over the past few weeks, I've gone ahead and rewrote the document. I've deleted all the connection-oriented sections (this is not to say that these sections didn't have merit, just that they belong in a separate document), massaged some of the text, and put a small twist on the protocol. The twist is an Integrated NLSP (I-NLSP), that will provide security services for both IP and CLNP. I wrapped it all up in an Internet Draft style and the document is currently awaiting an in-house review. Once that is finished I hope to submit it as an Internet Draft by 8/30/93. The document isn't flawless by any means. It still suffers from some technical ambiguities and deficiencies that ISO felt were necessary. I've put in several notes where I think the worst of these are located. Some of my interpretations may also have opened up other problems. All of this can be worked out in open discussions, once the Draft is posted. I think the document is more readable now (at least the PDU structure is located in one section ;). It is a good starting point for the services that are needed. I firmly believe that one protocol for both stacks is the best way to go (especially since the Internet is looking into CLNP for various reasons). I also hope to start rapid-prototyping the I-NLSP protocol starting in October but that depends on funding. Sincerely, K. Robert Glenn (NIST) glenn@osi.ncsl.nist.gov