RE: [LinkSec] LinkSec 80-2.1AE Teleconference notes 9/16/03
An excellent use for an informative note in the spec I suspect.
I'm of the pursuasion that specs should convey their message easily as
well as accurately. This is probably because I've had to read to many
terse ones.
DJ
David Johnston
Intel Corporation
Chair, IEEE 802 Handoff ECSG
Email : dj.johnston@intel.com
Tel : 503 380 5578 (Mobile)
Tel : 503 264 3855 (Office)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-stds-802-linksec@majordomo.ieee.org
> [mailto:owner-stds-802-linksec@majordomo.ieee.org] On Behalf
> Of Russ Housley
> Sent: Saturday, September 20, 2003 5:02 PM
> To: allyn romanow; stds-802-linksec@ieee.org
> Subject: Re: [LinkSec] LinkSec 80-2.1AE Teleconference notes 9/16/03
>
>
>
> Allyn:
>
> Thanks for the clarifications
>
> I take issue with this comment. It is not true.
>
> >>>.10 fragmentation shouldn't be followed, allows arbitrary
> fragmentation
> >
> >I think the person who said this feels that 802.10 allows an
> arbitrary
> >amount of fragmentation, in this case, more than
> fragmentation into two
> >segments, and that he feels that he does not want LinkSec to do
> >fragmentation in the same way that 802.10 did.
>
> Take a look at IP -- that allows arbitrary fragmentation. The
> fragmentation is 802.10 could only be invoked as a result of crypto
> expansion, so we knew that two fragments was sufficient. Further, by
> breaking the expanded PDU in half, we knew that any
> subsequent encryption
> from another SDE-enabled bridge would not need fragmentation.
>
> Russ
>
>
>
>