Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Accepting the following draft as WGworkitem(pendingdiscussion)

From: "Alper Yegin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2008 13:51:21 +0300

draft-vinokour-dhcp-reconfigure-option-00.txt

I think this is a bit tricky for IETF. 

For protocols we define, we expect them to survive in hostile environments.
For that, we mandate use of either an in-band security mechanism (e.g., RFC
3118 for DHCP) or an explicit lower-layer security (e.g., IPsec between the
Mobile IPv6 end points).

I understand the scenario where some lower layer security (direct or
hop-by-hop, not even necessarily known to the protocol end points) may
substitute for the former types of security mechanisms.

But if we were to go down that path, would we be generalizing this to other
current and upcoming IETF protocols? If not, why not?

Alper

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg