Subject: [IPsec] New Version Notification for draft-kivinen-ipsecme-ikev2-minimal-00

From: Tero Kivinen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 16:44:00 +0200

I wrote draft about the minimal IKEv2 implementation. It does not try
to change anything in the RFC5996, it just explains what kind of
implementation would be useful in some machine to machine
communication scenarios and which would still be complient to the
RFC5996 (with an exception of not supporting certificates).

The document contains 44 pages, from which the actual protocol
description is about 5 pages (IKE_SA_INIT and IKE_AUTH). Half of the
document is payload format diagrams copied from RFC5996.

This document is meant for people who are not using IPsec for VPNs or
similar, but are thinking whether IPsec and IKEv2 could be used in for
small devices for machine to machine communications.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
A new version of I-D, draft-kivinen-ipsecme-ikev2-minimal-00.txt has
been successfully submitted by Tero Kivinen and posted to the IETF
repository. 

Filename:	 draft-kivinen-ipsecme-ikev2-minimal
Revision:	 00
Title:		 Minimal IKEv2
Creation_date:	 2011-02-23
WG ID:		 Independent Submission
Number_of_pages: 44

Abstract:
This document describes minimal version of the Internet Key Exchange
version 2 (IKEv2) protocol.  IKEv2 is a component of IPsec used for
performing mutual authentication and establishing and maintaining
Security Associations (SAs).  IKEv2 includes several optional
features, which are not needed in minimal implementations.  This
document describes what is required from the minimal implementation,
and also describes various optimizations which can be done.  The
protocol described here is compliant with full IKEv2 with exception
that this document only describes shared secret authentication (IKEv2
requires support for certificate authentication in addition to shared
secret authentication).

This document does not update or modify RFC 5996, but provides more
compact description of the minimal version of the protocol.  If this
document and RFC 5996 conflicts then RFC 5996 is the authoritative
description.
-- 
[email-masked]

---

From: Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2011 08:39:01 -0800

Thanks, Tero. I doubt that this will become a WG item because we are 
hoping to shut the WG down after our two current documents are finished. 
However, I would encourage people on the list to review the document, 
particularly for things that Tero missed that *need* to be in a minimal 
implementation. I'm hoping after a rev or two that Tero will publish 
this as an RFC.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium