Subject: [IPsec] Key points of Case 2 of draft-abad-i2nsf-sdn-ipsec-flow-protection and going forward?

From: Linda Dunbar <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2017 22:40:13 +0000

Tero, Gabriel, Rafa, Alejandro, and Interim meeting participants:

Thank you very much for presenting justification for Case 2 & Reasons against Case 2 at yesterday's I2NSF Interim. It is a very productive discussion.

In a nutshell:
Opponents believe Case 2 is technical feasible but very complex;

Proponents understand the technical difficulty but want to describe an approach for pushing the complexity to SDN Controller.

Question to Proponents: What is the advantages of Case 2?

Is the Case 2 for making the NSF simpler to not include an IKE daemon and its configuration files?
 Some people say that all platforms today include an IKE daemon: Windows, Mac, Linux (all distros), even all phones. Do all containers support IKE implementation? How about all VMs?

Question to Opponents:
If it is technical feasible, but have risks, can we document the risks associated with the method in the draft?

Thank you very much.

Linda