More IP Security


Dave P. Wiltzius (wiltzius@lll-lcc.llnl.gov)
7 Jun 88 00:19:04 GMT


We at LLNL would like to use the IP security option. See the
plea for help below. Also talked with people at LANL (sorry,
the former is Lawrence Livermore Nat'l Lab and the latter is
Los Alamos Nat'l Lab) and Sandia Labs. Apparently all three
labs are ready to migrate to TCP/IP to some degree. All three,
I think it is safe to say, will need one or both of the
IP security options (LLNL apparently will need both).

I would recommend getting familiar with RFC 1038 even though
it is a draft since (at least a few) vendors are already
complying with it.

RFC 1038 specifies the use of the IP Basic security option and
defines the IP Extended security option. I know of a few vendors
of IP routers that intend to comply with RFC 1038 and one vendor
of TCP/IP products for hosts (TWG) that intends to comply with
it.

Anyone know what kind of support for RFC 1038 can be expected from
DEC (Ultrix in particular), SUN and others (Ardent, Silicon Graphics,
etc)? The local sales folks want to help but . . .

Thanks.
  Dave (wiltzius@lll-lcc.llnl.gov)



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 09 2000 - 14:42:30 GMT