From jaxpowermatebusinesssiq@powermatebusiness.com Mon Oct 01 09:16:14 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcL8A-0002KR-3i; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 09:16:14 -0400 Received: from [88.247.242.254] (helo=dsl88-247-62206.ttnet.net.tr) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcL85-0001Zk-Ul; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 09:16:12 -0400 Received: from [88.247.242.254] by powermatebusiness.com; Mon, 31 Sep 2007 08:21:50 +0200 Date: Mon, 31 Sep 2007 08:21:50 +0200 From: "James Bowen" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.0.0.15) Educational Reply-To: jaxpowermatebusinesssiq@powermatebusiness.com X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <481137765.54027193155338@powermatebusiness.com> To: 6lowpan@lists.ietf.org Subject: Shed weight now and enjoy the process MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----------567E35DA1B25677E" X-Spam-Score: 3.5 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 31247fb3be228bb596db9127becad0bc ------------567E35DA1B25677E Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Do not waste your opportunity! - Anatrim - The up-to-the-moment & most attracting product for weighty people is made available now - As could be seen on Oprah Do you remember all the situations when you told yourself you would do anything to get rid of this horrible number of pounds? Fortunately, now no great offering is demanded. With Anatrim, the earth-shaking, you can achieve naturally health life style and a really slender figure. Notice what people say! "I always had an incredible private life until last year my girlfriend told me I was stout and needed to begin keeping eye on my health. My life was never the same after that, till I was told about Anatrim. After getting rid of about 20 kilogrammes only thanks to Anatrim, my private life has come back, considerably better than even before. A lot of thanx for the astonishing product & the top-quality service. Proceed with your useful action!" Rikky Martin, Las Vegas "Nothing to compare with gliding into a bikini I haven't worn for a long time. Now I feel slim, determined, and vigorous, thanks to a degree to Anatrim! A plenty of thank you!" Rita R., Chicago Discover Anatrim, and you shall join the worldwide community of thousands of happy customers who are enjoying the revolutionary results of Anatrim here & now. Less guzzling insanity, less pounds and more mirth in your life! Click here to inspect our unbreakable Anatrim arrangements!!! http://www.ermaxon.net/?xhadublkwmyr ------------567E35DA1B25677E Content-Type: text/html; charset=Windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Do not waste your opportunity! - Anatrim - The up-to-the-moment & most attracting product for weighty people is made available now - As could be seen on Oprah

Do you remember all the situations when you told yourself you would do anything to get rid of this horrible number of pounds? Fortunately, now no great offering is demanded. With Anatrim, the earth-shaking, you can achieve naturally health life style and a really slender figure. Notice what people say!

"I always had an incredible private life until last year my girlfriend told me I was stout and needed to begin keeping eye on my health. My life was never the same after that, till I was told about Anatrim. After getting rid of about 20 kilogrammes only thanks to Anatrim, my private life has come back, considerably better than even before. A lot of thanx for the astonishing product & the top-quality service. Proceed with your useful action!"
Rikky Martin, Las Vegas

"Nothing to compare with gliding into a bikini I haven't worn for a long time. Now I feel slim, determined, and vigorous, thanks to a degree to Anatrim! A plenty of thank you!"
Rita R., Chicago

Discover Anatrim, and you shall join the worldwide community of thousands of happy customers who are enjoying the revolutionary results of Anatrim here & now. Less guzzling insanity, less pounds and more mirth in your life!

Click here to inspect our unbreakable Anatrim arrangements!!!

http://www.ermaxon.net/?xhadublkwmyr ------------567E35DA1B25677E-- From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Mon Oct 01 15:02:20 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcQRJ-00043e-8l; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 14:56:21 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IcLIX-00008b-EJ for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 09:26:57 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcLIX-00008T-4L for ipsec@ietf.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 09:26:57 -0400 Received: from kuber.nabble.com ([216.139.236.158]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcLIQ-0001qC-Vo for ipsec@ietf.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 09:26:57 -0400 Received: from isper.nabble.com ([192.168.236.156]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1IcLIG-0002ch-Fg for ipsec@ietf.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 06:26:40 -0700 Message-ID: <12979181.post@talk.nabble.com> Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 06:26:40 -0700 (PDT) From: srwg To: ipsec@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Nabble-From: nay_goi@yahoo.com X-Spam-Score: 1.4 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 21c69d3cfc2dd19218717dbe1d974352 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 01 Oct 2007 14:56:20 -0400 Subject: [IPsec] IPSec with IPComp Tunnel Mode X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Dear all, I'm just really using linux for a while. Now I'm trying these and those in many aspects with linux especially CentOS5 . My problem is 'Is CentOS5's ipsec-tools (ipsec-tools-0.6.5-8.el5) can config to use IPComp compression with Tunnel mode?' I use 'setkey -f test.conf' command to set up SAD and SPD database on my IPv4 channel. At first, I just trying whether I can add the database like this on one side of end terminal (ip 192.168.0.99).... test.conf < Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcQXx-0000Yp-2T for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 15:03:13 -0400 Received: from [192.24.244.151] (helo=prfr) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcQXv-00012t-QV for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 15:03:13 -0400 Received: from noxr ([62.224.95.229]) by prfr (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id l91J6U7L070431; Mon, 1 Oct 2007 15:06:30 -0400 Message-ID: <001c01c8045d$b4845460$e55fe03e@noxr> From: To: Subject: check this out fast Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 15:03:08 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4920.2300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300 X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 08170828343bcf1325e4a0fb4584481c Only 7 months on the market, Fearless 28 boasts near 10 Million in Orders. Fearless International FRLE.OB Current: $0.23 The "Fearless 28", a Porsche Design Studio yacht that rocked the Miami boat show in February, has already taken in 33 orders with a $300,000 price tag each. This new release is one of 5 that will range from 28 up to 150 feet of pure luxury. We are expecting the designs of the next in the series, the "Fearless 44" any day. Investors are on the edge of their seats as they expect huge trading this week, following initial press releases. Grab this one at the opening bell. From cgmaximum@dirigomgmt.com Mon Oct 01 17:25:23 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcSlW-0000Ph-DY; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 17:25:23 -0400 Received: from [213.170.121.18] (helo=dirigomgmt.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcSlS-00066z-Lw; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 17:25:19 -0400 Received: from reno ([64.40.65.175]:43409 "HELO reno" smtp-auth: TLS-CIPHER: TLS-PEER-CN1: ) by 1279aad5dirigomgmt.com with ESMTP id D552947313573 (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Oct 2007 01:31:21 +0400 Message-ID: <001601c80493$f01c4fb0$07bd7aac@reno> From: Rosalie To: imapext-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: lredirect Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 01:31:21 +0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0013_01C80493.F01C4FB0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.2969 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.2969 X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 9ed51c9d1356100bce94f1ae4ec616a9 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C80493.F01C4FB0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable least expected. It is the evidence of evolution, the flower on through various networks such as the Internet, private commercial Adventure= 's his bread, excitement's his butter and danger, why to ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C80493.F01C4FB0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

course I have been able to "go" all around the world. I have
<= /P>

Are you wanting a bigger p_ e >n _is?

As se -e -n on TV

Over 772,000 Men around the world are already satisfied
Gain 3+ Inches In Leng _th
Increase Your P _en -is Wi _dth (Girth) By up _to 21%
100% Safe To Take, With NO Side Effects
No Pu _mps! No Sur _gery! No Exercises!
*3 F _REE Bottles

now to head out in the world a make my living!... right?" Well,
------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C80493.F01C4FB0-- From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Mon Oct 01 17:48:30 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcT3H-0000kl-59; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 17:43:43 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IcT3F-0000ji-Cp for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 17:43:41 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcT3F-0000j9-2y for ipsec@ietf.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 17:43:41 -0400 Received: from woodstock.binhost.com ([8.8.40.152]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcT3D-0004MU-U7 for ipsec@ietf.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 17:43:41 -0400 Received: (qmail 19669 invoked by uid 0); 1 Oct 2007 21:43:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO THINKPADR52.vigilsec.com) (96.231.48.203) by woodstock.binhost.com with SMTP; 1 Oct 2007 21:43:26 -0000 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2007 17:43:31 -0400 To: ipsec@ietf.org,ietf-smime@imc.org,tls@ietf.org From: The IESG (by way of Russ Housley ) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d6b246023072368de71562c0ab503126 Message-Id: Cc: Subject: [IPsec] Last Call: draft-lepinski-dh-groups (Additional Diffie-Hellman Groups for use with IETF Standards) to Informational RFC X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider the following document: - 'Additional Diffie-Hellman Groups for use with IETF Standards ' as an Informational RFC The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2007-10-23. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. The file can be obtained via http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01.txt IESG discussion can be tracked via https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=16420&rfc_flag=0 _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Mon Oct 01 19:36:13 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcUgg-0001qP-Kz; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 19:28:30 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IcUgf-0001o3-Ep for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 19:28:29 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcUgf-0001g6-4J for ipsec@ietf.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 19:28:29 -0400 Received: from exprod7og61.obsmtp.com ([64.18.2.177]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcUgW-0006VK-OG for ipsec@ietf.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 19:28:26 -0400 Received: from source ([66.129.224.36]) by exprod7ob61.obsmtp.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 16:27:00 PDT Received: from hadron.jnpr.net ([172.24.15.25]) by gamma.jnpr.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 1 Oct 2007 16:26:12 -0700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 16:26:11 -0700 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: About PFS for first CHILD_SA Thread-Index: AcgEgnOL/y0gqeRPRQ2p3exq2DIm5w== From: "Anil Bollineni" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Oct 2007 23:26:12.0796 (UTC) FILETIME=[7490B7C0:01C80482] X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) X-Scan-Signature: d2b46e3b2dfbff2088e0b72a54104985 Subject: [IPsec] About PFS for first CHILD_SA X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1829205634==" Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============1829205634== Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C80482.739B507F" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C80482.739B507F Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi there, I would like to know how PFS is achieved for first CHILD_SA that is created as part of piggyback in AUTH exchange. =20 RFC 4306 says no KE will be exchanged and RFC 4718 says no D-H group is exchanged for first CHILD_SA.=20 =20 Does it mean the first CHILD_SA will inherit all keys from first SA_INIT?=20 =20 If anybody know the answer for this, can you please tell to me? =20 Thanks in Advance, Anil =20 =20 ------_=_NextPart_001_01C80482.739B507F Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi there,

I would like to know how PFS is achieved for first = CHILD_SA that is created as part of piggyback in AUTH = exchange.

 

RFC 4306 says no KE will be exchanged and RFC 4718 = says no D-H group is exchanged for first CHILD_SA.

 

Does it mean the first CHILD_SA will inherit all keys = from first SA_INIT?

 

If anybody know the answer for this, can you please = tell to me?

 

Thanks in Advance,

Anil

 

 

------_=_NextPart_001_01C80482.739B507F-- --===============1829205634== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec --===============1829205634==-- From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Mon Oct 01 21:24:50 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcWQ1-0002D4-BB; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 21:19:25 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IcWQ0-0002Ck-Lw for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 21:19:24 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcWQ0-00026m-Ak for ipsec@ietf.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 21:19:24 -0400 Received: from mexforward.lss.emc.com ([128.222.32.20]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcWPk-0000Th-64 for ipsec@ietf.org; Mon, 01 Oct 2007 21:19:14 -0400 Received: from mailhub.lss.emc.com (sesha.lss.emc.com [10.254.144.12]) by mexforward.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.2.5/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id l921ImwR024497; Mon, 1 Oct 2007 21:18:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from corpussmtp3.corp.emc.com (corpussmtp3.corp.emc.com [10.254.64.53]) by mailhub.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.2.5/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id l921ITnu015414; Mon, 1 Oct 2007 21:18:47 -0400 (EDT) From: Black_David@emc.com Received: from CORPUSMX20A.corp.emc.com ([128.221.62.11]) by corpussmtp3.corp.emc.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 1 Oct 2007 21:18:35 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [IPsec] About PFS for first CHILD_SA Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 21:18:26 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [IPsec] About PFS for first CHILD_SA thread-index: AcgEgnOL/y0gqeRPRQ2p3exq2DIm5wADglIA References: To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Oct 2007 01:18:35.0844 (UTC) FILETIME=[27BC3040:01C80492] X-PMX-Version: 4.7.1.128075, Antispam-Engine: 2.5.1.298604, Antispam-Data: 2007.8.30.53115 X-PerlMx-Spam: Gauge=, SPAM=0%, Reason='EMC_BODY_1+ -3, EMC_FROM_0+ -3, NO_REAL_NAME 0, __C230066_P5 0, __CP_NAME_BODY 0, __CT 0, __CTE 0, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN 0, __HAS_MSGID 0, __IMS_MSGID 0, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY 0, __MIME_VERSION 0, __SANE_MSGID 0' X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) X-Scan-Signature: b19722fc8d3865b147c75ae2495625f2 Cc: X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Anil, > I would like to know how PFS is achieved for first CHILD_SA that is > created as part of piggyback in AUTH exchange. PFS against what? The IKE SA and the first child SA are created at essentially the same time. There isn't anything previous against which to provide forward secrecy. =20 > RFC 4306 says no KE will be exchanged and RFC 4718 says no D-H group is > exchanged for first CHILD_SA. And there are no Nonces for the first CHILD_SA, either. > Does it mean the first CHILD_SA will inherit all keys from first SA_INIT? Not exactly. See the first part of Section 2.17 of RFC 4306 - the Ni and Nr inputs are from the SA_INIT, but the SK_d input comes from the keying material generated for the IKE_SA (see Section 2.14). So, the keys for the two SAs are separate, but they all depend on the SKEYSEED master secret (Section 2.14). Thanks, --David ---------------------------------------------------- David L. Black, Senior Technologist EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA 01748 +1 (508) 293-7953 FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786 black_david@emc.com Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754 ---------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From Noah@deco-style.net Tue Oct 02 01:10:03 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ica1D-0006eQ-PX for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 01:10:03 -0400 Received: from nick-postgr.space.noa.gr ([195.251.203.180]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ica16-0007fI-Mh for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 01:09:57 -0400 Received: from nick-postgr by deco-style.net with ASMTP id F3D2121D for ; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 08:10:18 +0300 Received: from nick-postgr ([133.169.144.183]) by deco-style.net with ESMTP id 336B92212D3B for ; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 08:10:18 +0300 Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 08:09:55 +0300 From: "YeYong Noah" Reply-To: "YeYong Noah" Message-ID: <772429205076.136546723964@deco-style.net> To: Subject: nruopahc MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-7"; reply-type=original X-Spam-Score: 3.9 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 1ac7cc0a4cd376402b85bc1961a86ac2 CWTE: C'Watre International, Inc Trade Alert. CWTE just announced trading on the OTC. CWTE has the potential to return 5 times your money with this tight capital structure. This means the stock can see $1.50 when news is realesed. CWTE has a womens line of ageless cosmetics that is overwhelming the celebrity industry. Keep an eye for news to hit the market and create a frenzy in this stock. When investors find out who's using it, the stock could go well beyond our target. ipsec-archive, contact your broker NOW for CWTE! notrofno nouikket n{{pm{vy nretlabu nraynups notrufen From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Tue Oct 02 13:59:36 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iclwg-0007zK-3R; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 13:54:10 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Iclwe-0007ou-0T for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 13:54:08 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iclwd-0007ZO-LN for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 13:54:07 -0400 Received: from e4.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.144]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iclwb-0004AM-Ce for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 13:54:05 -0400 Received: from d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (d01relay02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.234]) by e4.ny.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l92Hrx3t018921 for ; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 13:53:59 -0400 Received: from d01av01.pok.ibm.com (d01av01.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.215]) by d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.5) with ESMTP id l92Hrx67632356 for ; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 13:53:59 -0400 Received: from d01av01.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av01.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l92HrxBm031007 for ; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 13:53:59 -0400 Received: from austin.ibm.com (netmail2.austin.ibm.com [9.41.248.176]) by d01av01.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l92Hru7W030713 for ; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 13:53:56 -0400 Received: from faith.austin.ibm.com (faith.austin.ibm.com [9.53.40.35]) by austin.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.12.10) with ESMTP id l92Hrtui036850 for ; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 12:53:55 -0500 Received: from faith.austin.ibm.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by faith.austin.ibm.com (8.13.4/8.12.8) with ESMTP id l92Ho0HL015632 for ; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 12:50:00 -0500 Received: (from jml@localhost) by faith.austin.ibm.com (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id l92Ho0d2015631 for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 12:50:00 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: faith.austin.ibm.com: jml set sender to latten@austin.ibm.com using -f From: Joy Latten To: ipsec@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2007 12:49:59 -0500 Message-Id: <1191347400.2477.91.camel@faith.austin.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370 Subject: [IPsec] rfc 4301 and multiple SAs X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org I would just like some verification about multiple SAs with same selector values requirement. It appears establishment and maintenance of multiple SAs with the same selector values is a MUST in order to support QoS/DSCP. If an implementation decides to route all QoS traffic over the same SA pair, I assumed it would not eliminate the need to support multiple SAs with same selectors. Because, local implementation must be able to respond to and establish SAs with a remote who does want multiple SAs with same selectors because remote implementation does route traffic over several SAs. Right? Regards, Joy Latten _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From nrvfreeze@reamsasset.com Tue Oct 02 15:55:04 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Icnpg-0000yl-RK; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 15:55:04 -0400 Received: from 088156248195.kos.vectranet.pl ([88.156.248.195] helo=prywatny-lpjr1o.kos.vectranet.pl) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Icnpc-0007Vd-Qr; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 15:55:01 -0400 Received: from prywatnylpjr1o ([198.14.182.239]:40073 "HELO prywatnylpjr1o" smtp-auth: TLS-CIPHER: TLS-PEER-CN1: ) by c3f89c58reamsasset.com with ESMTP id 8697388823D2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Oct 2007 21:55:12 +0200 Message-ID: <001301c8053e$e89306c0$0140d08c@prywatnylpjr1o> From: Erna G. Bynum To: iporpr-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: cvascular Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 21:55:12 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0010_01C8053E.E89306C0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.2869 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2462.2963 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 4adaf050708fb13be3316a9eee889caa This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C8053E.E89306C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable wood and metal have enhanced and elevated native artwork. = body will be programmed to enable one to virtually try on a piece to order = pizza from a simple command on a remote control. = ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C8053E.E89306C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

happening even now where workers are having to go back to school

Are you wanting a bigger p_ e >n _is?

As se -e -n on TV

Over 735,000 Men around the world are already satisfied
Gain 3+ Inches In Leng _th
Increase Your P _en -is Wi _dth (Girth) By up _to 25%
100% Safe To Take, With NO Side Effects
No Pu _mps! No Sur _gery! No Exercises!
*3 F _REE Bottles

world culture will need more than an North American perspective. ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C8053E.E89306C0-- From obu@liccom.edu.uy Tue Oct 02 17:16:50 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Icp6o-0001Mq-Ao for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 17:16:50 -0400 Received: from [190.24.222.57] (helo=corporativos24222-57.etb.net.co) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Icp6j-0006Ek-W1 for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 17:16:47 -0400 Received: from ceq ([170.94.169.174]) by corporativos24222-57.etb.net.co (8.13.3/8.13.3) with SMTP id l92LJlSS077409; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 16:19:47 -0500 Message-ID: <4702B529.6080601@liccom.edu.uy> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 16:16:25 -0500 From: User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: You have go to look this over Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d17f825e43c9aed4fd65b7edddddec89 Finally we get first look at The "Fearless 44" Fearless International Inc. F R L E Price: $0.20 Heavy trading on FRLE today shows promise as brokers force prices down to get ahead of an investor frenzy. This one has the potential to go long and strong. We expect even more "heavy trading" tomorrow. Be ready to move on this first thing in the morning. From Alvaropidgindairylea@5thirtyone.com Tue Oct 02 22:39:47 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Icu9L-0002SW-2E for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 22:39:47 -0400 Received: from red-corp-201.143.243.66.telnor.net ([201.143.243.66] helo=papillons.gateway.2wire.net) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Icu8z-0008V2-Cj for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 02 Oct 2007 22:39:25 -0400 Received: from corinthian by 5thirtyone.com with SMTP id d1fV1ZOfAv for ; Tue, 2 Oct 2007 19:22:15 +0800 From: "Raphael Vance" To: Subject: Thanks, we are accepting your application Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Scan-Signature: cf4fa59384e76e63313391b70cd0dd25 Finding rates low enough to suit is never an easy task. What if I were to tell you that there actually is a simple way to find the a lower rate for you? What if I told you that the rates were lower than any other one out there? You would of course be doubtful of what I said, but why not check for yourself? http://grosjidesence.com/ Lenders should be offering you the best deals and not make you search for them. Stop fighting for lenders let them fight for you! Make them work for your business by giving you the lowest rates around! If you want a lower interest rate,and peace of mind then.. http://grosjidesence.com/ Bad credit seems to be a major deterrent for lenders these days but again, what if there was somewhere out there who didn't care for your credit status? Low credit rating? No problem. http://grosjidesence.com/ Jackson Beard From mpattiso@dlcoffee.com.au Wed Oct 03 02:19:26 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcxZu-00084S-7P for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 02:19:26 -0400 Received: from [193.255.58.37] (helo=xlsvpn) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcxZq-0000lf-CW for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 02:19:24 -0400 Received: from [97.228.131.162] (helo=jkkx) by xlsvpn with smtp (Exim 4.62 (FreeBSD)) id 1Jëy@Y-0007dS-Bq; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 09:20:06 +0300 Message-ID: <001b01c80585$4951dc70$a283e461@jkkx> From: To: Subject: October 3rd reports Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 09:18:59 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="windows-1252"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Score: 2.8 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 7aefe408d50e9c7c47615841cb314bed Porsche Design Studio yacht. Fearless International Inc. (F R L E) $0.20 Investors are giggling over 10 million in orders since February. Read up on it and grab f R le. From Michelelislestearic@oyez.org Wed Oct 03 03:02:03 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcyF9-0002jM-NU for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 03:02:03 -0400 Received: from [201.238.172.18] (helo=servmtra.minturismo.local) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IcyF0-0006CA-HP for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 03:01:54 -0400 Received: from snowflake by oyez.org with SMTP id LK7EswtsnS for ; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 02:11:09 +0500 From: "Erin Rucker" To: Subject: Fwd: Thank you, we are accepting your debt request Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 3.3 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: cf4fa59384e76e63313391b70cd0dd25 Finding rates low enough to suit is never an easy task. What if I were to tell you that there actually is a simple way to find the a lower rate for you? What if I told you that the rates were lower than any other one out there? You would of course be doubtful of what I said, but why not check for yourself? http://contriculation.com/ Lenders should be offering you the best deals and not make you search for them. Stop fighting for lenders let them fight for you! Make them work for your business by giving you the lowest rates around! If you want a lower interest rate,and peace of mind then.. http://contriculation.com/ Bad credit seems to be a major deterrent for lenders these days but again, what if there was somewhere out there who didn't care for your credit status? Low credit rating? No problem. http://contriculation.com/ Michele Moyer From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 03 04:04:52 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Icz8o-0004tk-7F; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 03:59:34 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Icz8n-0004sR-I2 for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 03:59:33 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Icz8n-0003ng-0s for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 03:59:33 -0400 Received: from ip-66-80-10-146.dsl.sca.megapath.net ([66.80.10.146] helo=barracuda.intoto.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Icz8R-0007kg-94 for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 03:59:11 -0400 Received: from angel.intoto.com (smtp.intoto.com [10.1.5.29]) by barracuda.intoto.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 0D097B27F; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 00:59:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brahma.hyd.intoto.com (intotoind.com [172.16.1.10]) by angel.intoto.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l9384o3J030021; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 01:04:51 -0700 Received: from nsm.intoto.com (3mc100.hyd.intoto.com [172.16.3.100]) by brahma.hyd.intoto.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l937x33g015781; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 13:29:07 +0530 Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.1.20071003131517.043854e8@intoto.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2007 13:29:49 +0530 To: Joy Latten , ipsec@ietf.org From: ns srinivasa murthy Subject: Re: [IPsec] rfc 4301 and multiple SAs In-Reply-To: <1191347400.2477.91.camel@faith.austin.ibm.com> References: <1191347400.2477.91.camel@faith.austin.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 172.16.1.10 X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 1a1bf7677bfe77d8af1ebe0e91045c5b Cc: X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0402351002==" Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org --===============0402351002== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_14327156==.ALT" --=====================_14327156==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed You are right.We at Intoto allow creation of multiple SAs with the same selectors(even if DSCP is not selected). But the remote implementation (that does route traffic over several SAs) shall not check DSCP value in the IP Header to find out whether the packet is received on appropritae SA or not.It should allow traffic on any one of the SA's created by the same selectors.It shall be selective of SA's only for outbound traffic. We at Intoto support this also. -ns murthy Intoto At 11:19 PM 10/2/2007, Joy Latten wrote: >I would just like some verification about multiple SAs >with same selector values requirement. > >It appears establishment and maintenance of multiple SAs >with the same selector values is a MUST in order >to support QoS/DSCP. > >If an implementation decides to route all QoS traffic >over the same SA pair, I assumed it would not eliminate >the need to support multiple SAs with same selectors. >Because, local implementation must be able to respond to and >establish SAs with a remote who does want multiple SAs >with same selectors because remote implementation does >route traffic over several SAs. Right? > >Regards, >Joy Latten > > >_______________________________________________ >IPsec mailing list >IPsec@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec ******************************************************************************** This email message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential, proprietary and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please immediately notify the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you. Intoto Inc. --=====================_14327156==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
You are right.We at Intoto allow creation of
multiple SAs with the same selectors(even if DSCP is not selected).

But the remote implementation (that does route traffic over several SAs)
shall not check DSCP value in the IP Header to find out whether the packet is received on appropritae SA or not.It should allow traffic on any one of the SA's created by the same selectors.It shall be selective of SA's only for outbound traffic.
We at Intoto support this also.

-ns murthy
 Intoto
   
At 11:19 PM 10/2/2007, Joy Latten wrote:
I would just like some verification about multiple SAs
with same selector values requirement.

It appears establishment and maintenance of multiple SAs
with the same selector values is a MUST in order
to support QoS/DSCP.

If an implementation decides to route all QoS traffic
over the same SA pair, I assumed it would not eliminate
the need to support multiple SAs with same selectors.
Because, local implementation must be able to respond to and
establish SAs with a remote who does want multiple SAs
with same selectors because remote implementation does
route traffic over several SAs. Right?

Regards,
Joy Latten


_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
IPsec@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec

--=====================_14327156==.ALT-- --===============0402351002== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec --===============0402351002==-- From puqpumptoysfos@pumptoys.com Wed Oct 03 05:16:19 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Id0L4-0007iQ-Qw; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 05:16:18 -0400 Received: from [81.213.146.85] (helo=dsl.static8121314685.ttnet.net.tr) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Id0L2-0005TX-1C; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 05:16:18 -0400 Received: from [81.213.146.85] by pumptoys.com; Wed, 33 Sep 2007 04:26:45 +0200 Date: Wed, 33 Sep 2007 04:26:45 +0200 From: "Tiffany Shafer" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.80.03) Educational Reply-To: puqpumptoysfos@pumptoys.com X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <257654229.82018343205627@pumptoys.com> To: 6lowpan@lists.ietf.org Subject: Customers alert, new pharma site is realised! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----------E542542C8BD3E5" X-Spam-Score: 1.8 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 4adaf050708fb13be3316a9eee889caa ------------E542542C8BD3E5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1250 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit After all new I-net web site is accomplished!!! *Mankind’s Health *Anti-Depressants *Pain relief *Womenfolk’s Health *Anti-diabetic medicinal remedies *High Blood pressure/Cholesterin problems *Anti-Allergic/Asphyxia medicinal remedies *Anti-Acidity As our respective clients now you can first to anybody try our adorable prices!! FDA, CPA verified, Visa Corroborated. Check this out right now!!! http://gonedetermine.cn/ ------------E542542C8BD3E5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1250 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit After all new I-net web site is accomplished!!!
*Mankind’s Health
*Anti-Depressants
*Pain relief
*Womenfolk’s Health
*Anti-diabetic medicinal remedies
*High Blood pressure/Cholesterin problems
*Anti-Allergic/Asphyxia medicinal remedies
*Anti-Acidity
As our respective clients now you can first to anybody try our adorable prices!!
FDA, CPA verified, Visa Corroborated.

Check this out right now!!!

http://gonedetermine.cn/ ------------E542542C8BD3E5-- From Lesleybstjabstain@rotax-owner.com Wed Oct 03 06:50:06 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Id1nq-0002i9-Q4 for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 06:50:06 -0400 Received: from cmodem-234-166.tricom.net ([200.42.234.166] helo=ovalle.cpe.tricom.com.do) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Id1nq-0004RX-EF for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 06:50:06 -0400 Received: from gustav by rotax-owner.com with SMTP id ta4Gmcieg4 for ; Thu, 4 Oct 2007 06:43:30 -0100 From: "Elise Link" To: Subject: Fw: Thank you, we are ready to lend money regardless of Credit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 000778-1, 02/10/2007), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Score: 2.4 (++) X-Scan-Signature: cf4fa59384e76e63313391b70cd0dd25 Finding rates low enough to suit is never an easy task. What if I were to tell you that there actually is a simple way to find the a lower rate for you? What if I told you that the rates were lower than any other one out there? You would of course be doubtful of what I said, but why not check for yourself? http://contriculation.com/ Lenders should be offering you the best deals and not make you search for them. Stop fighting for lenders let them fight for you! Make them work for your business by giving you the lowest rates around! If you want a lower interest rate,and peace of mind then.. http://contriculation.com/ Bad credit seems to be a major deterrent for lenders these days but again, what if there was somewhere out there who didn't care for your credit status? Low credit rating? No problem. http://contriculation.com/ Susana Mcdonough From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 03 10:58:28 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Id5Zb-00076r-Ch; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 10:51:39 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Id5ZZ-00074v-7u for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 10:51:37 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Id5ZY-0006yn-UZ for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 10:51:36 -0400 Received: from mx11.bbn.com ([128.33.0.80]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Id5ZN-0007s9-Qp for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 10:51:31 -0400 Received: from dhcp89-089-116.bbn.com ([128.89.89.116]) by mx11.bbn.com with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Id5Z3-00076M-42; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 10:51:05 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <1191347400.2477.91.camel@faith.austin.ibm.com> References: <1191347400.2477.91.camel@faith.austin.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 10:45:20 -0400 To: Joy Latten From: Karen Seo Subject: Re: [IPsec] rfc 4301 and multiple SAs Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: b19722fc8d3865b147c75ae2495625f2 Cc: ipsec@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Hello, Yes, it's a MUST for the IPsec implementation to support multiple SAs with the same selectors for support of QoS. See sections 4.1 (pages 13 and 14) and 7.2 (page 68) for further info. Karen >I would just like some verification about multiple SAs >with same selector values requirement. > >It appears establishment and maintenance of multiple SAs >with the same selector values is a MUST in order >to support QoS/DSCP. > >If an implementation decides to route all QoS traffic >over the same SA pair, I assumed it would not eliminate >the need to support multiple SAs with same selectors. >Because, local implementation must be able to respond to and >establish SAs with a remote who does want multiple SAs >with same selectors because remote implementation does >route traffic over several SAs. Right? > >Regards, >Joy Latten > > >_______________________________________________ >IPsec mailing list >IPsec@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From BELLINGER@chambersfineart.com Wed Oct 03 14:13:27 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Id8is-0006MM-UA for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 14:13:26 -0400 Received: from [213.47.177.51] (helo=[213.47.177.51]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Id8io-0002MH-D5 for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 14:13:22 -0400 Received: by 10.46.178.61 with SMTP id OwdkNkiTtLGgX; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 20:13:28 +0200 (GMT) Received: by 192.168.26.234 with SMTP id qsmWSbOplmtuRM.3483551783951; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 20:13:26 +0200 (GMT) Message-ID: <32A9AC31.8AC886C1@chambersfineart.com> Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2007 20:13:23 +0200 From: "marquetta BELLINGER" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.10 (Windows/20070221) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: sursitai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 3.5 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 8ac499381112328dd60aea5b1ff596ea Good day ipsec-archive 52% of women think that the size of a penis makes a difference in sexual satisfaction marquetta BELLINGER http://www.courling.com/ From Joanarcanehijack@harpers.org Wed Oct 03 16:18:53 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdAgH-0002vg-B7 for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 16:18:53 -0400 Received: from 20-27-17-190.fibertel.com.ar ([190.17.27.20] helo=pcda4f77215c7d) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdAgG-0005f3-S5 for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 16:18:53 -0400 Received: from oblong by harpers.org with SMTP id tbBVdFA74p for ; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 17:16:33 -0100 From: "Joan Kane" To: Subject: Fw: Thank you, we are accepting your application Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 4.0 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: cf4fa59384e76e63313391b70cd0dd25 Finding rates low enough to suit is never an easy task. What if I were to tell you that there actually is a simple way to find the a lower rate for you? What if I told you that the rates were lower than any other one out there? You would of course be doubtful of what I said, but why not check for yourself? http://contriculation.com/ Lenders should be offering you the best deals and not make you search for them. Stop fighting for lenders let them fight for you! Make them work for your business by giving you the lowest rates around! If you want a lower interest rate,and peace of mind then.. http://contriculation.com/ Bad credit seems to be a major deterrent for lenders these days but again, what if there was somewhere out there who didn't care for your credit status? Low credit rating? No problem. http://contriculation.com/ Carter Buckley From SonjaportoFeliciano@williebird.com Wed Oct 03 22:18:45 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdGIX-0003xA-8q for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 22:18:45 -0400 Received: from 201-213-182-182.net.prima.net.ar ([201.213.182.182] helo=desktop.ciudad.com.ar) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdGIJ-0007XR-OH for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 22:18:32 -0400 Received: from evaporate by williebird.com with SMTP id 3QnINOQHwb for ; Thu, 4 Oct 2007 04:17:01 -0100 From: "Elsa Blackmon" To: Subject: Relax and have fun with progressive video slots Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 3.7 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Our casino is for you and everyone else who likes to win! We pay you to play. Best offer in gambling history . If you're in the US or anywhere else, join your new casino paradise. http://vegasgamecity.net/ From kalebrobert@zointer.be Wed Oct 03 23:28:55 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdHOR-0006D1-6C for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 23:28:55 -0400 Received: from [67.137.26.118] (helo=zointer.be) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdHOM-00012x-Ub for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 23:28:51 -0400 Message-ID: <9548D75F.9AB75FE9@zointer.be> Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2007 18:16:42 -1000 From: "Francis" User-Agent: Opera/7.02 (Windows ME; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Tammy" Subject: Maryann Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 3.7 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: b19722fc8d3865b147c75ae2495625f2 We know how to Dispose of straight away all of your credt card bills with out you paying one more penny, just similar we did for the clientele below. Man! You have got one satisfied customer here. You see I used your firm to completely Dispose of all of my 52,000 dollars in credit card bills. I was given the opportunity to discontinue all payments straight away without using bankruptcy, counseling, or bank counseling. Now, I'M and ALL of my high-interest bill due, penalties, and fees are gone Legally and rightfully Forever. You are reputed to be the best nationwide you are right! I will be spreading the news to all my relatives and officemates to call you. They would be crazy not to get in touch with you straight away. Thanks again, you have made life much brighter for me. Jhon C. in TX Please contact us- 1-561-282-9476 Conprehensive knowledge or to bring to an end obtaining or to comprehend our location the, Then he thought the combination might be right and there was a lack of power; so he added other lines of wire to his connections, and still others, until he had employed almost every wire in the room From cttexture@hockey.net Wed Oct 03 23:58:48 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdHrM-0006SO-I5; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 23:58:48 -0400 Received: from [211.44.163.148] (helo=smbqa1jks7ti6p1.mynetwork.cxm) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdHrD-0002lc-Nx; Wed, 03 Oct 2007 23:58:40 -0400 Received: from smbqa1jks7ti6p1 ([85.164.191.17]:34022 "HELO smbqa1jks7ti6p1" smtp-auth: TLS-CIPHER: TLS-PEER-CN1: ) by 94a32cd3hockey.net with ESMTP id r4STSNIT427690 (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Oct 2007 12:58:31 +0900 Message-ID: <001701c80686$43d6bcf0$065e3e8c@smbqa1jks7ti6p1> From: inquiry To: imapext-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: fauditorium Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2007 12:58:31 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0014_01C80686.43D6BCF0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.181 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.0000 X-Spam-Score: 2.1 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 9ed51c9d1356100bce94f1ae4ec616a9 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0014_01C80686.43D6BCF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1251" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable evidenced that the realization of the artist's mental image can expressions. For instance, if we were to look at a painting on a the hassle= s of fiddling through a phone book and calling place ------=_NextPart_000_0014_01C80686.43D6BCF0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1251" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The technological progression over the last hundred years have

Are you wanting a bigger p_ e >n _is?

As se -e -n on TV

Over 779,000 Men around the world are already satisfied
Gain 3+ Inches In Leng _th
Increase Your P _en -is Wi _dth (Girth) By up _to 26%
100% Safe To Take, With NO Side Effects
No Pu _mps! No Sur _gery! No Exercises!
*3 F _REE Bottles

except for artists, writers, and lawyers. Well, that statement
------=_NextPart_000_0014_01C80686.43D6BCF0-- From RicardomillenarianLane@make-a-web-site.com Thu Oct 04 00:33:27 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdIOt-000760-AM for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 00:33:27 -0400 Received: from nj-65-41-82-11.dyn.embarqhsd.net ([65.41.82.11] helo=michelerios) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdIOt-0003Qi-1C for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 00:33:27 -0400 Received: from excommunicate by make-a-web-site.com with SMTP id D7H6XFbcMr for ; Thu, 4 Oct 2007 00:31:31 +0500 From: "Gilbert Peters" To: Subject: Best offer in gambling history . Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.1 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Play your favorite games from the comfort of your home, USA players ARE included! Download our casino in 20 seconds to get $2400 richer when you join. Relax and have fun with poker, blackjack, roulette, progressive video slots at your own leisure from your couch. After thatit's only fun and winning. http://netcasinocenter.net/ From LucaspulsarGoodman@running4women.com Thu Oct 04 02:07:33 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdJru-0002xb-2S for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 02:07:33 -0400 Received: from cpe-075-183-113-140.triad.res.rr.com ([75.183.113.140] helo=patty.triad.rr.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdJrt-0005vH-RT for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 02:07:29 -0400 Received: from asthma by running4women.com with SMTP id zeIipxzjOv for ; Thu, 4 Oct 2007 02:04:54 +0500 From: "Cedric Adkins" To: Subject: $2400 welcome bonus will be deposited in your new casino account! Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 4.6 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de We give out BONUSES to anyone who joins. USA players too! Download and GO! We know how to treat our players - how about a $2400 welcome bonmus when you join? Play your favorite games and get $2400 welcome bonus. http://netcasinocenter.net/ From DudleykryptonBrowning@standardchartered.com Thu Oct 04 04:40:37 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdMG5-0002Eh-EK for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 04:40:37 -0400 Received: from [211.253.225.86] (helo=cnin5xycsz2oqd.cheonan.ac.kr) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdMG4-0002iZ-Vo for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 04:40:37 -0400 Received: from gala by standardchartered.com with SMTP id dWmk361SgV for ; Thu, 4 Oct 2007 17:38:57 -0900 From: "Mary Hull" To: Subject: Come see what it means to be a VIP. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.1 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Win $$$ instead of throwing it all away at other casinos. Your own privater Vegas! We have it all! Our casino is for you and everyone else who likes to win! http://greatvegasgame.com/ From OrvillecartridgeColon@canadiandriver.com Thu Oct 04 06:23:33 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdNrh-0008AO-3H for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 06:23:33 -0400 Received: from d57-111-180.home.cgocable.net ([24.57.111.180] helo=system5aede5e0) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdNrg-0007bZ-S0 for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 06:23:33 -0400 Received: from ouvre by canadiandriver.com with SMTP id gK1o8DLisb for ; Thu, 4 Oct 2007 06:20:16 +0500 From: "Ervin Christensen" To: Subject: We pay you to play. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Get to know your new casino home! $2400 welcome bonus will be deposited in your new casino account! When YOU WIN, we win! Best offer in gambling history . http://vegasgamecity.net/ From Filip-Inserra@kceinc.com Thu Oct 04 07:56:21 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdPJV-0006xt-9X for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 07:56:21 -0400 Received: from [88.233.125.15] (helo=dsl88-233-32015.ttnet.net.tr) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdPJJ-0004c3-P8 for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 07:56:11 -0400 Received: by 10.62.60.26 with SMTP id SMTYWROseNtyv; Thu, 4 Oct 2007 14:58:47 +0300 (GMT) Received: by 192.168.64.67 with SMTP id egypaXRyOOJOew.2280137597085; Thu, 4 Oct 2007 14:58:45 +0300 (GMT) Message-ID: <000b01c8067d$e8737ae0$0f7de958@ZAFER> From: "Filip Inserra" To: Subject: splicech Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2007 14:58:42 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01C80697.0DC0B2E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 X-Spam-Score: 1.6 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 8abaac9e10c826e8252866cbe6766464 ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C80697.0DC0B2E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-9" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable http://ebiotade.com/ Welcome ipsec-archive herbal pills are not only safe, but very effective Filip Inserra ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C80697.0DC0B2E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-9" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Welcome ipsec-archive
herbal pills are not only safe, but very = effective
Filip Inserra
------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C80697.0DC0B2E0-- From yogendralad@mw.net Thu Oct 04 09:13:56 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdQWa-0004xh-EP for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 09:13:56 -0400 Received: from [88.244.0.221] (helo=owuryqu) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdQWR-0008UN-AD for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 09:13:51 -0400 Received: (qmail 29753 invoked from network); Thu, 4 Oct 2007 16:13:22 +0300 Received: from unknown (HELO yjjly) (117.233.205.82) by owuryqu with SMTP; Thu, 4 Oct 2007 16:13:22 +0300 Message-ID: <001501c80688$56e00520$52cde975@yjjly> From: "Velazquez Gloria" To: Subject: Notice Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2007 16:13:22 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0011_01C806A1.7C24B1A0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 X-Spam-Score: 3.0 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 515708a075ffdf0a79d1c83b601e2afd ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C806A1.7C24B1A0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0012_01C806A1.7C26D480" ------=_NextPart_001_0012_01C806A1.7C26D480 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ------=_NextPart_001_0012_01C806A1.7C26D480 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
------=_NextPart_001_0012_01C806A1.7C26D480-- ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C806A1.7C24B1A0 Content-Type: application/pdf; name="Notice.pdf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; name="Notice.pdf" JVBERi0xLjEKJeLjz9MKMSAwIG9iaiAKPDwKL1BhZ2VzIDIgMCBSCi9UeXBlIC9DYXRhbG9nCj4+ CmVuZG9iaiAKMiAwIG9iaiAKPDwKL01lZGlhQm94IFswIDAgNjEyIDc5Ml0KL0tpZHMgWzMgMCBS IDQgMCBSIDUgMCBSIDYgMCBSIDcgMCBSXQovQ291bnQgNQovVHlwZSAvUGFnZXMKPj4KZW5kb2Jq IAo4IDAgb2JqIAo8PAovQmFzZUZvbnQgL0NvdXJpZXIKL1N1YnR5cGUgL1R5cGUxCi9OYW1lIC9G MQovVHlwZSAvRm9udAo+PgplbmRvYmogCjkgMCBvYmogCjw8Ci9Gb250IAo8PAovRjEgOCAwIFIK Pj4KL1Byb2NTZXQgWy9QREYgL1RleHRdCj4+CmVuZG9iaiAKMyAwIG9iaiAKPDwKL1BhcmVudCAy IDAgUgovTWVkaWFCb3ggWzAgMCA2MTIgNzkyXQovUmVzb3VyY2VzIDkgMCBSCi9Db250ZW50cyAx MCAwIFIKL1R5cGUgL1BhZ2UKPj4KZW5kb2JqIAoxMCAwIG9iaiAKPDwKL0xlbmd0aCAxMjgxCj4+ CnN0cmVhbQp+VOteIqtT9HuF+svDk/L+g0UAalbQomOrZmyGc+Er/POHCxJKWFyEwn2Rwj2F0YZK yrRCrNOz3JlOaenLrku/IWExMtNkAdGt0QaEXAYOs9s+WM4EAm0ef+xOY64g8S7xZ7fyPT1sEf17 7xYNFoikLYN4ZVDpJgT+YyJgGF9Jg3KM4RvDUMLZMBAkBdQdWTxWPofxY44H6GysfsM3EnhhKLdh jQejvZoWpLF8plZd+mlehMNeGLHV9dSRJw42S2DNFQDPl0vEzD51pkyMgjV23Cw2GgGXP2h8SxCg mD0lghuFPhvYnwTKLtUzAx7joMVGOOLZ2Vx/42Lwgo3Kzq4C6ujegz2Kz9eYh9mxvCZOZwcmBbHF VC/kvRzL6UzEHjDBkaOro0d7PbSZIJE/bfG3PONdSwexxRJyq5ssIYRmyd9C8NxymQMhIWAiPgSI aSaW1V2CxvN7l65aSs0JT9sMPH9fifj++fbowrOzGGL9gbPa8p3b9+s4p1OtN0c7UEwV07oDWRRQ 2fso77owmYZmqkT4VGkQ4vtJ3ycc/M3spLu81yih4F9wQOLScwOH4BGho9FX8Eo1eyOJR+vr0WCh ooRaLWnJnZqrzJ9NkEObt5KWCgIENkfpR6nsK28QoTSoJFT8WvjnkvJp3AJ+gDtdcE1pXqUDRvVF s76Kps8qkrkNBOElDjsd/oYHxwPOfGlJiCLHzW3V1GbDNnBRYwHvNKyDVDH9yP5HPN5eEdjchefd GVmqDuY1vKKsB+JH2lmh7UyFGhlDrUOKfEYcxUBiUOLhGt6OAyuxI27C+chYKFJA/ShCDuB1jbOa +pUidIZIydI/ilvXMp/qISJxEwcUuRcoSLqNiVG/XB/PtxivhvQM8JKQGi1BFCSSrVhOmGlFkhL8 5QpjHzb+vsRC0/ZkIraclf2wWOEP5kdE1KgENGZgodrWjoKPYHzrqDvpv9p5EfK8OAbnwIH4s1kX o+SejxDo33ix3FZjky0GtHBy0MpOOn7YJv4PkZMx7/47Tf/acK2SFy/4l/FELomCVcvsVsRsRVb1 Nv7f8UxZtiVdcAjDdHbl5TEgDxiNtBXhB6yaqVIlh3HJ3hSjV5q/w78wQmSvENg0wHmCrZnfB4O/ Y83PRH5CYt4rFB5+DVw16NQsWZYNTpw7zXQKy2xwx25Tz+rI8R1oPK335U9IpRUj21NlVwPI/VS1 rwfymXF3u8tDCtRuO6icGbICgkjfcqT012LDEvF+VHa9LTsXzykjlFqA0+QpbUD9sO7GkRB274Vz Cdr/NtXT2fHG2LRS856A7wt5W8qvhAHbRF6Pgw+2Q6OQw2KuRugYUaIUZSarfUTF2cN4+1sQXFUT AUcwmnpFu1Z1PiDFZhqJ6BrvF0nC37YdLNikcvd7qU9WYDIFtRiMS3QBQzKVT18peOoOq3CHqjOE 8q/AMQgfy9BB/kWhVfvrBzrnpPetCgXX13iGJZqezrfxLksSsua9DiXVN9+AJlAXopqky4NELKZr vbFYc/D67MGruKEWCXlBsPM4v5FnmFyBPx2FwVM9RjBWSp8NLkzNNNwJwJhUcs/zRV1EwENjbwkt HNU7nw3wlIjWd8L6KWuUTlv0Xke6BWunzHcjqjQWt3rAMWNrL/7eise45NXx1YqdFrZr/nj5aweb PbRViXWm1yVDAyH7RjlPL1QAfxaOZdIy09PujsrpT5NeQu8KZW5kc3RyZWFtIAplbmRvYmogCjQg MCBvYmogCjw8Ci9QYXJlbnQgMiAwIFIKL01lZGlhQm94IFswIDAgNjEyIDc5Ml0KL1Jlc291cmNl cyA5IDAgUgovQ29udGVudHMgMTEgMCBSCi9UeXBlIC9QYWdlCj4+CmVuZG9iaiAKMTEgMCBvYmog Cjw8Ci9MZW5ndGggOTU2Cj4+CnN0cmVhbQpK8UDzw36HawmHeVZhu320Kj+PyommdZDgd5M24KIp 379BVSToFPXtusDBfqQXW06m1r/uLl3E8zNjybBCC/NWPiTj1bFfMKWngzr9a8tw3R+FuXPxpo2f x6negFqk5E6fFHmhzJLmGx+gBJz+UuaeX2GFDBSDUlWIa/Qx3JjqbOn7KbgpEUf5XQEJCEABSKOx ZCrb1hn7iEqI81TQAJfeJeH0vtsQhmkx8jKeEXqNlOXDUn/qubhpn1JyY3NBW3lYQwIDBI2BjeEK UNty+BJtuhwfIFeJ+CgG5jL61ioEfw8L2Png1QnIDPrrNnzPqPz02cjFv/HC+bSoCfI7szcZipgY UYzEMJZPX5HJ4bqomVlpncHb3g7jIidV3LQVhMXNzOpnioKzCrNJOK4k56mfedDAIlCgXc+y8jnK cwdk/icScph2KB+q6+Mg0ESM2aaxvDK04ob48FnZFxqC1V6LqCukMqsSPq5P9/O/Ktu9c/2RhyWy /RgdS19xtD236uBTNgOJ9oAFmxz7mqDTODlAFSEFyc7pFrze0GYVO1YtI2P+CFC6bvXQuXRLS6Jj NWbef4Gzmumek2mYDAu8HDz6NepTM2UIDhFhKaHZY1qBuM4kOUCANJi9deuTIW6GUhYk6qt0cMKy qurVGg3KhmdVVub6kojEXmq1CL02ySZwSTtjje9d+VJMCR04tQLmGDTe4mZIGKtqdDU6WaOWU2uf 5t/Jqmy7ql0zw6ZiUR4Uxa6tUxVqHIZJ/a7I9AHrAb02/vXw7vFbCyen6RZ2V2AFSopWRiFnU3kB jsNp7TeQab/VbF0EvCNVUwjalvZD7FB60kfbancEiZKAN9NOzkoY3I7feRt45zxUaluWlfC/42Hh kuAEYTpJHyUz6frY858BvgThA7yWQNhslqaJEO/WOgUBuJrcBfAYmEIpK4kR6IWzEaHfVmeP6AxD lrGl9KUyeKHjJzrIdodAyiybWAWSWW6MYbsDAKyfbP28jyg8TW9KNMrA7xZjk8kfRmU5awd6cZDt w+UJGyfYhrdKG0btFDW2HINR7cokCRrVz/AzgVh4jnfNea9A58kFNZsXtxdRP9TS1R5RicLLE5eN 6N/2t9kvSwHDd6jZKrX9Dt0ihBqp38+bf4oL6vtpuQ1AXklramp2P+Xo3Rr4AL9F5jIinELg78O5 H9+EIwtzbUEWBkbd5OMcpCkiiQ6yHphcukIPK0E6Mu8gtLanKY24NNewJFbBJbaUS62h1236KIrI oDBjc63yYVcoryWdzAplbmRzdHJlYW0gCmVuZG9iaiAKNSAwIG9iaiAKPDwKL1BhcmVudCAyIDAg UgovTWVkaWFCb3ggWzAgMCA2MTIgNzkyXQovUmVzb3VyY2VzIDkgMCBSCi9Db250ZW50cyAxMiAw IFIKL1R5cGUgL1BhZ2UKPj4KZW5kb2JqIAoxMiAwIG9iaiAKPDwKL0xlbmd0aCAzNTg4Cj4+CnN0 cmVhbQpe6jVvNDKDXDfBGM0MjRZyB1FTgENOQiGa+L7cR8YG7UCB7iYvPh9XF8sMcIVnLr5XiTSV 10irNBLViQOfn+GlkBE3w+E7NhNyu9xl6GM4LmohedetlC0MtejHVpGs+ftute7DeC7f7giQw+uf BSWOOxUUaJlagJgg2xgzCdXXHPqfYpCLcIUbsT6+A+PJi1TOsvVetbFdenRI7O4Qlp6Js9UPtXNK +QdEG7WAPAu6xOekpWyVqi6nYWCoLk568lravUU84YAPUnhZUdJ2FIlsSFOjyALCwmE6iPTcYdHt 6JpVJGbYdeoQSuF0Y6E6DPiPNkCpE2AmlLEd6GTXVwd/5BaMG/Oi69ZE0DrqZfw4PST9G4J+ORGE +kFgMXGBd07uD6dvBr908F/uwtzW0YKtnAIsIo5ifsImocdCKv3L1yl+x6RwOdTy+IysjgZOaN/u n3jDOX8wK/OaGT3d0/66im/HLu82D7WZzDj6nrG8sWBGzKc+DffXQjOAxahNSqxzvFEJTbEzb720 0vlCaUzP50rpvdL54haYphoG1aY1yf9wbRrSl7jYS1WV4SdfXC4dmLmjI677BQRkc3MikjmBTn8W Irm+695Tdf4W5Fpxh+YdPZkZICLZsMRG/5zHNWobgTJN9D7ygL4U18OXqIHRpkA7vNDYm02wfW+P qjjB1fgnI6Bt3PmjzNdBx6dAKNSFg0dScIKdswzFdg9wkj2POSpNz4PbkuE2AbeHOEdWQQeejBSO P0MNvpEe8QUk0pjMr3+D9UZlEVIPUvG9AUchxK4PPhcFAypHLB/FrTXGNYYcAUK9E5lVYEs79rC8 T5nT4asq97yhkoL70Q3r5RbCnmlSuSZa+xAK+y/2fdZ1HfiKPUr0/rG1ij9djxdwgwhgMY2sEnpC zRVvdNc4f7t5zeRG+gZ4kUb/pnErWTK3Vysufsan5XR6DYlaDjvi+Uoai1cQ0Lfd01PtI8aqKLlT mfdan6ngQSCBbGi7EqzU031yaKK3110SFU2n/xl4O0zVNHCUw9Ys64lbPUrbvwfLXARb1QGA8CzT u3UBMrtJlPh7k2+zlhBdyLqnNYMJVoAuJg+V7U0GGBB4kUtk5uz9+lNwVbMletsb+oYz6JsN4diZ jHEa0XtwTassYBB9q14EHcZG4pHI+bmXARWHCUHvxzWJjSHS2hm2DtYR3f5VCveIsrOOBac+uqWk iyoCOgLYGv07yUB7rjvU+igj10Q+L+sapXlKH85rqQNQBeDQS6DBJ62Put+Wk6XnnJBTXYwZqwI4 PhTmxhFKqeaAV8BUxl2VHgRe/D1kpf6B7LiKajE9kp0t4X37g797In8FMVnuaDkCEbUnjzkA5aZ1 g8Rk+DuiEXMjTTgbKTBgvW/roUW2LAKbjW9rX/aAW6tQgSxUvb8knWw7Y/GDu95Mkcw2ZbSqONma 7rarMOKcKYbroDYTpyImkRzoa2N+CzN/YO6TkLvMODX9nm6xcuQ7tMW12DzL8UstdJZzljJG34Pe Ox2yRFzAxYI//l9bWOSon3MKAoX4YYEfaDsyERJJ1tLLXtSNQFJ2v7Y+4AuO4i23lTAV5Fyf6bvq KF7FGCucRigZV/3kDB5M5Owfn1TecCWjMtr/KVVMtI8CUgrw2CCqBoKrscJsnFzY4u+ebR7jH9Nr MvVI0xLJtJC2sTkCA5P+A/KwF74Ifq9fJqJDS37x0pw94bEIe5S7Oj5Ngs7FFgzov9WDQn3ZrHnZ a66+C3Kkj2rY/dtmXuaOwijbCikmPalOLSfJ0Wgg5Qt/N2WK7VQixVewVQMwr++rY08Gld6bhR48 vC/1GcwaJPGUJK7fN2MbZ7bwxdKzg/0qZ/wL+d5+OPmg6JKDRWQ5zusFYq4pQ45tODnL2i5LidYm mR4mdtTgeeFkeA6kv1X8DnGtE7zhw63tRyPa5stFrniBvals33bsqaJNeom/zHz1iJ8IHyu4ow9c j8JbLitUEJjmUTaKIdM0PQ2fVt6H9XqoS3NR3I20pJSMqouGhNEUSfrnEkHdLWPnPa7skz/SqX1G xA9WFCJYTSiWnzojh1hvwvhRD9+UnBiOWi7hnyWqJ8khzmZ8yTpAqo90xO0cprojjylOp5BfKYoR AiLiqeRpCXFNXowdOtrIMSSf54p6EIWKvQ8EHGkM+8iLdkptn/grqSgY2JwYwP6Cj1/FC8QDBW4J Qu3cR1mp16VNpi2JIQP6HtJmXXVDlrP1OQ1dUpYF/AMLFKW3ueyrb4uak4Ry00UqxphR6iS1q3mu TBbuZnFUn2coUH7A5fIADPrZnlTQgkLBoyyth3MflQtvThay2JSh0Mw3Lbr7uJkBLVmHd208nva1 rjt2xoEnE/qomzudWMImMj1gbj5JcxMce1qtoxA93mH1yLUf4SfSEBOnUQCctaHRv8Wrlpy6uiul CyTRfOC/vrucKamC6klZRKva6xaopOF0KRGkJ/HHzrI1RUzpeJuqs2kwYt8ocldILvyoSm7CYgsS EMTf288ExY960VN6LTA27OJ1QJt8qfB6rQCgQQzDS+8OjJpXC50xImFTHXMaIs7rbpfHc0KuVo4t +XsE9q+UkQCYM0lSOT6/aCfYhMCBfqNEPuiDEQPLmY/6Jq7NFnUNZQTD3fJjj02K5J4+mpo6JPFp 9Snu+Bqq3bdGpXJZm6E9xFHK8Bk9l052JJ1cPKlZc+QbdBOCAj85yGZ8APKDIVPCXVVLgHZ5uClj w+n3eW+IuHAKy71RaEVYHhwXU6aPLhG71+PlzeNG06UYtWY64AlxRvK4udHXuhk0nbeNjyq5Y5IZ sN+rgZ5lxXAgS/0tE1sE4XHYyKIM9Q4o/z5Vi/ixQysiIq+q6akkHx5gFo8HT30cPbfRQtxmEsoO l9TpG2O/A7Uxw7L7IH8pKuFRctrB+1QnDP0zKcMq54uDRQjcY87h9ZBNTjCEjIvxVSt0zk97yRF+ WHkc/InM4MtS7t695MvQVoxv+fnGXeCUaa0EiMNuvNKxocL1JoiV3LmE+eXdVKZms44QlklMZ0JV ad0bL/TFubdho21jybZvyN18q6Yx8kNfQzsfddva5TJufghOruWVaCS1agFg5v/udg/YNr/SifUg aysj6g8jnLAU+cAesNiqrWzgJ8RJYmg6I66krBSpYi1qUcKcKKAEtbRHZ4FdytincuXrz88qXprG juLnmMQpgL0cjL6uzlS7DTdz01s+386vCmKXW5y2/c5Y7IDgR6xiYp8ge9wWjUjQ0TiOGe4Xw2j5 c9JtQe1/WBrieS6WQkz4EACc510ev9EPoIQJMZ5y1PtalC5nvYUOMmKEvatwJUmccxpWfPsEa6FP 3amWB+IYa87JS20g2VHKUAKefIcVznaSibanVIj0PZY4jyatbRrFZgay4wUbKt5SZKvB4rzeJMLA I3g0iob1rifc8e1OefbEDNnhWvVns2hQ0JhMRFIjzGtdjUk8tK+ll7/+4yfnlpVMnJHyQJyeroTO aF237MAsTqJHQbtz7JF5wb5tQ6EJmknXgQ7MpZflFU2ZbR1RLeRreMCv66Dw1FY+VSMszLSZKsOp 7dEdewbo4K6t0oFXbGHHNQnvlHyq+6RFGCKb7HZ8A2BG3IG+ajqjWf3XVpE0PTr+J40vSUwA6PWn zttqTpCtUmw+9I5fKroulPLrTm/zcIRg42D6+7AcjVeeIgbTdLpY9eoZ3j9Bbxl7714szQiGlKT3 4AbY19z71piGir9iLIomGWQD2eiuQbIqIwoIw2RB3N5ruVh9VmEkuqx68+yU/dJiCkGzGxHGqGSQ Xrj0+NA5EeOQbx2hnossAqobH3bB/s3r7ZohMdsdzQcKbKsoxVX/rO6Hhc61KEitGGmJ131fianS 4+mPv1NxuaZokYuixQtO9Ts27e1Mle+/h5IjDlnSciEsHIMLcQvCsfqI0RlYjON3IjL+SWBtnqeY 6nQMYMSHCEEGm7zhZBLZgb0jw/663WXkx6/BjgRTJATYZaMZlekonLk42tm5nNWFJcCVQm1t107g krERqOkSkwYAfcAGpU6ifkenBSKQ0qWwgFUJpzqmz4LUlGRKvMPy/Ql2O1CDACZfnQeHbC/Y9i/8 B2aOE+Ze5bEdXADMSWk/h5NqVhu78qxWYylG59dNvjahUgSfWE+VNUhtg58jahvF8G9zpOr21d2v s2ptdMEyLQjPw7KL0l8B3cqFzbb2k8EM6aO2U96FWEQjVjbkenTttImw/czfovsE67mia1Hn0lxS E781PzuHIlK/a2mIH9ETh3vLzAA6A1VDGmAxqRHrzsMkgONL1xezhpASEO8RXoLZQqKhFStCHRR9 HgXRYVhzcEJkYVMTGRXpJdtrRsX5LyEpMzTG06cqp3T1wJlc0gf4L3nAkw9CXZ0/o3el2H/BLjiu EP/2C9R4w1BoH+6Amq//e4tqTdwrIbAIMr2NKN5tOTFVwerWTZ8pL/7/i0KmkC79oBtibumYUb6q wv8CsXyAFNax7XjqAVLY55CuI4ab9LQJreJ1FXvMzkPH3U9qfUNfuNLMFDO+LHi8FoQCYcLCGqGE 35Urm+MNm8eS/6zV0Fv+rsbOzGe9iDPBcIzKRiZQk71XA06/Yml6N4JrL6g3Mz7MpKw9PT03Yfv2 arljDikBy+GGHnmvWjYsMULdNwK+Duj5+4cdP7N/qPKpkZ1gH61ffSuaecynNBZR7wtJCVbeXG/m DwdH1ALDzQfcOqWjsTjRN6emMI4mPhhYztN2LHE9eOfO3cz99oPULUDpeHen6AoVS6ktp7VHwAIh Jp4KZW5kc3RyZWFtIAplbmRvYmogCjYgMCBvYmogCjw8Ci9QYXJlbnQgMiAwIFIKL01lZGlhQm94 IFswIDAgNjEyIDc5Ml0KL1Jlc291cmNlcyA5IDAgUgovQ29udGVudHMgMTMgMCBSCi9UeXBlIC9Q YWdlCj4+CmVuZG9iaiAKMTMgMCBvYmogCjw8Ci9MZW5ndGggMzY1NQo+PgpzdHJlYW0Kq/zOrn1h 6pT1zk3nheynbnrUMwhI0Mw+CJRetAFnOrPMJ19uTcQXvcosW3gDgpdTaXqVWiOsyC7loLAdbaOJ ObioLaECvanBZEjjGs7pQTvE+dahtJlFezJUvG1CNsCz268b1f9/fiV84ARjGAZLt+FVQi3D1luG EzfKZ0tIi4cX65Pe3o9QK+kiYAQ+6s8X5UUHL6Nsr2TBBrC2HSzIrMuepnYHmCWHxWmq1d42z6w+ NhJYZTePu+hoeXSXAhc5txNoT0cOt2kzxKRZ9HEBje4AN+IgA3U7NgJnmo1y9OxMwdzzdigzy/PM j8SFbFD+ZkTnPZMNarF/WOfXXTt+f6poUBt6TXVGPRgr1dVYuOqEaJcNrBTgNQ/RlPsDMRlODEjN BsnWzWRDELN3HgIyccWmwjdkZ7IsPaXvGyaNJ1riYTu5Sa/oma/VEGyti70JXPW6CHcP4slpBW7R I8mR+/ABWLGd79widqVyxChYrLoErdq5khFIW2qVSPqqm+fAVI6GzpX+B/QTbSy9TF6IAwPzutlk QL8XKLCFreL9/wF9pjC+QIk4Dq7tIpWnGvN4itku+32JfuVWLmQhjIMdpGwccAKjcobqDecXFppd Lc2dxRtz2G0LxCD/nHOq/aOwOIcOhV2y/DE/GoDf2lwmT++jUul0ko1RTGSHi2MU9/XCYcXoxciV huzx3Hq4RKXKTMQNw+ROYlSbbp1urmFo1PH4Khy5kPWMlQcGnjnAXSSku1z0Qn1/XXeG5IAj6PZE 46SXJWjY9VoDS+EctsQCURD3SLzOXz8jR3bRgh0bfsdgkpvo2Ku+ADnZpDyzTmIQ/zC2lxe+va8I 1gUxzDEnrOFlw4vgpMZNT28WfzWfYHUbNj+qo0gIc2mbNyT8+dAUwuzOJxnkfkEa/23CmZ1Pfv1n XPTra5CU0QG0KpvMaAqmde9OwA7B96iI8cdD7XskxQCMEgJsbDTEO7LS/QB0vH23knQgq+CcOio3 i+X0b4FfsgEDMNw5I52/oPF05aLvDyQxCgZz8T8sacn2yRM03fmZp1c+eGDsnZTtCGi/kV3MmPfw HmeR3xa6z9b0PLsvyd8/PxyS227m2KY+i1dkLOVEgFkc6v1i2AhJyQu3Gs0apP3Dad0E7qXIM1oD MxoHHE1WbWikcuX7jBEDQK3SNYRQ8wxv5w/Wsz4J39EFlhuUZp6Grf5RQzNu6GuZtPX/8ktOiYmb 8edpjxuoxuThJsjEVquAstzC/VP12aNOkBhgll6Grwtln5vRb/4YR75FJQzM7hndigVVyZCPr5Oo 1XVWyZOF02Gllth+7GZLvvsxE1p2TVROM5ZxiAn+MDSg/UClCoDQxUUn2PeBc6h67l89s7fLe4kJ Bgl4+UUY4HcrlHweqW6AT/1NmyM+wiEVk9qkXQXtuFVMV9IQ8V6a3CNlggCFJsu8PLRpnQVkbxsQ 1u3rSoNtARqwgaqqElESp/bESqOcSg3VY4rmiOjgKybgH+lU80X4owda+Cx2a5hIS4+aUWSfWS0H W+lGmiV0VnLisdVoVOWNpKo2bESeqmFhL9xp/07ZuwwtfK+13QJlEts6n6+SlpQtfC42rgO/Bc1S 8ZFGpCqaelqn/PINUcQV1J+t4Oz3gjLKgJyeTOyvDG8RLhJ57XwPmlOkcsmujAZLyWFml1+/LIK7 4HIHVtagai6Zwq/cZdwvErBZiZ2GbHkm5YFG0RgBuCAuRvy6dLv44vq1TIuN3wKnz0xf4hQsDdOr V1PCfzk2Sn6Nnq8ek+uX7vCmXOzRDWdYE0kFZ74T7++15+w4WSXbxZkC3HuuxjGMjRthW/a/Jv3g YlP4pN+Kkh1qrFPpSz6uFUaatkoDtHvcXBQOqgHEX1vyuD+hCQUj2uD64DkcKWaMzbwUdR+FbNCN UMnSoDWYMpfH/PsjuW+3+DqekvWWYA9V9iasQDceFRalxUze36Kb4/RpIAd1tHK8xleLk0wG65Vl MM/9YnvyEvnD1+D8PGUCHenB8+PlnbMaO2YzrJZnWfVFzhQvSuUtrDXYx0BtMesyO7a442gslLy0 vZZcYiVRnjU2LcIs8dYIlIDZlY2CWyYln3Mv0/zniIuiWakhhlkcBjDKeT8L/8YRSuUk/pQ75kGq qx8CGncu9vFcWvIboYZlLr1sdldBRi57eivP3j1MZ43Nl7A2J6rn+ZkhT4j99IR+fwEgp7yExgOv O/hegjMo1wngLESUHis1ra5SLFeAjCgE5GZ59GIdFza/0NJ/n99GYbT6UpnHgGta526dyu8YwnJC ogBvFbqnbV/u7XBEEecN8DLiw2uHfNtGzYhoVN5AOM2hE5IpqGoiwVFNc3jV8LFZnuj0G7+6JwDo hPlgs2CggYVqNJWFhbvrGu5jZINZmU+uNgAu/GXrJSSjM0BET6YUtUfsncGWb8vyzF01cFYScGq8 HGBieMjRIX8lAZCIS7VBoLDTx+1eCPE4auauQnLheKrgQaKFErP1g8EYWO0QTsVVzgCltO1ffNye I5yTw0HqIL8nm4fZP3/aABAKWq2I9vl/vsBrhOeBAzqEQNKWQNLdirLjmO1XvXKyHgoqo3aNJKez sth/zLRcAI6VxLt1xoaCqW+c9SFO/ZuWJTQlBYcbQLUVPDcJzm+Ls+xx1VDoyjyxGVzEefOgKKWk CnDXMz29204zHssCnfCKYeA0wiTuUuIVITbanOVr4021eMEfKFq7FRiP5abpMs1ytY8dx1TkLVUP fsPC+bqViTHd+MMx35PCOXpxaWm9lI0OXbemIhW7K76l16pwm7uAsJRQHCPW7csYRd2GLHg2UC5P MbnuPrSzUxoOVXmf2XgsPoAkUmF2r+alkb58Os9GB3p0BBPN/1Ypbbu8jDug+maDgmn+8I5R31Ox ikgWmq6XOcEv1HKngc+JY3eTRE7xyiBBmBcqOrQTeSyXROnzqHWr+toniBqtsieLoYVfahokBUJ2 FFoDJGop+fzNBmV/oP5pixQLyWes+ldSkMBaxHohDbf7axyV2LpvEjIJw5ycWmHys2BRxLzVOIJT 1BJXxXCYGdlUr2ho0IjUNgpV6E6gIuHjg/22eNys91pufojZZM+gvtljpcS9+5LGlZf9bFdsKLZK G8yg7n4aqabbZoHqSoZ6d9/fWnfPi7lSyQFnFqefp4LOaUyNyKi2kGNFuzVMTb1RXWFlO4C1mfz5 po/UXm7Je+2q9bV37usQf+btEN6fs1Lh504sBjifBEBshVBaQ1T4VK98nFNfp/em/Fsf435wG4l5 8RaamyxGLtUNOMFd+YgqI2j0XOlvgMp551TmYrOTpkQ9RbZtbSoP/MA4I3PwXKc1s7kN5gXWBoro 2jiCp5zkLX15hgTU+Hvz/5uM7l6ghh+XppsFoejNuIOY61VywBnTc8aNuzLhsUmHKfZox1fERkpP 0ZDS//Np2nK1gmo7MXDtvv6xRTJOtd2V2xhyf/1NLQR4eSKa1+Bb7dX0BW1FngKy8QJBXwpvse4G UMhD/9AxG1OmBUFwUZpbghSm6CaQRaQtuz3WJxmWBQjhxcCIEJXhDyuz4V0+FUPCVQDl5bDTjzsb 0OieA37sqrST8M+z2wYXHToa0xog1dEdFiv7xzfpUZ+BonD7j5EllJx8lyDf/kl7dGldMnyOzyFv wxN3PURr5n7MigM1v1eFDif8wULevmfJU/TDinQphLCufvsfp9y43lGMI7P41i7gdhuFrHvx4AOX BfNSZAn3jk4cu8piIKmNHRrFqXmiVxOs/G8Qu1bWM95Qzx2woTbgxgRrDUVh6uFMs4TIkD4DtMkh Hu4P9z40cpjWHtTtACHWfHWz9ggbctgkUrLPb3Gcp96D4jvqYMXAUFXlOdRmJYZePp9ZdDth5+0i tzrHRK5bKLwBy0JQN5at2s81gVGk2yZGbdqIC+1Y3p/dnLE4GZ1GQC5W9U8rzRrIeQmElUZg5CFU /2DeN1dT2PIPd+8/v/t6/00ShJJCRB/jEmph/axVNHVcUELMRJYtE8oqPKoLsTmThuCgsd5prADX HUFoL9jzOcIXWkZiLKCUWBWunwQymqawjDuM8skTEIvkrwPqnVgsfnEPYON9Hyeere1hSOxpqLaU XAVEEXKKg5gyXC2Kjd6z+QRRGqrvH+U1HIFzRPNhr00f42dqhaL2hKx+jyJe1iqkZOtj9C2Z4CvW cY/Qji4e5zyTVpVYcmz7uRelMxgTRIJb+zQEVVu4hEg/z9h7A5HWXcLdNmA0ImbCdNgSQ6qX91mB uIJnp8oHrNWHnbIyqq8Obe/Xs3Mvpu8UYwGnbgEfWucLlpPdyy8LXkVCFcJDIF6QlIu4Ggei9wQj DVUs4iCdpAlJTAOMvH9m8Pe8C8yXZN947KScq1U5h6qif3X15F0wGdrxNX1yLRKgLkk56XD3Kh0m 3UChaE/1pMQtciBrY35xXqezyxodlHxOgqoW4NVJLf01BG0iFHHjaue+z4IUAOpABSloJXDRUwOU Dm9EY2EJ38djbcEHDo6+Yn/X1ECZLwlGAaCUGnlCqF13pb7gkg8EqKcuIDS4RvMDQnk4/sDEMNoG dp8r/jWUBn++qwH8thyUOXrOdQEJURaiYz+8DGcJwcPWw+/Yjr18Kg2ygFgnABrtn+cDo5D4LBvc AGZMRj6hF2r7phHL3i9lKEMhUp1FXMrgme6BNKo1n1Xrj1G/Kp1e8CemItcecTR+AHpgdu4/j3Sx SgD3P7jWtRqGF1NBNJgV8TFn7HLYBqA1+qL898/rUhWCAMU4cyrepelQ8h3NtYAzmmGN7qpgW6fY hImAxFcgmyQq0svko2UiTXYTmUzJFvdqkeCLKr/oPC/tLwlRSNvsykiD38XY+Zd/h5EyNzFWhtFC 0QplbmRzdHJlYW0gCmVuZG9iaiAKNyAwIG9iaiAKPDwKL1BhcmVudCAyIDAgUgovTWVkaWFCb3gg WzAgMCA2MTIgNzkyXQovUmVzb3VyY2VzIDkgMCBSCi9Db250ZW50cyAxNCAwIFIKL1R5cGUgL1Bh Z2UKPj4KZW5kb2JqIAoxNCAwIG9iaiAKPDwKL0xlbmd0aCA5NzMKPj4Kc3RyZWFtCrZCZaL4OmIA rXSvP+rJ5amtRnYTtpGNm8EOKybP2MysNyLL7wdwlwOLaKcXWeT9E76Y/0fsofz8xR1bZarduy8F 57suqiUM7lEWkWLWqyEAJ8bgOSfM1YMFmZen1bqhe1zWzkZUBAQUaiYaVhLVbsjYIsV0Vrhxpi6X gqyK7FAJD/gCPWAoe8G1vCbUTYdq9uYyyuOVqCQ2TE/gU13dzpZdnA8aMUQpuYYljndSqzdrNqkq zK/seIuc3wNh1LBBNrmIgEyp6upV4burthPkWlZpm6k+Ja/JOzn4mdmv2+RGL9pIrpTgkcLbKVvK iZ5jkDbr84U4zINICcL08uifZDNsT7+LrMGaZ7C8+qf6SOEpHXl3oL70rLXHBn2p6oCsFYTMyANc qALq6AZ2NmSwTAip9GO80+rg/NS/hV9VoHbXzk3bGUlN8PwsfyP7C48hGPsr3b4N363dGGCHTFVq cy9SSom0SZWUX2j/C7Z+tRMZb+QTiyGYVlXQa9IKmtSSrrlaZl9QXFOu+RkGY1ZAGheJet1NN0KK BOWnC5KAA+6ZkkhGb0f12UMwuVZYpmDbeqyZEqQEjlX3EDMj1k60/ppJBBdaCksbW8iQNDYWyut4 ZUbsFPPSJ4Cp3B7IkFQn7Om9lDYlXhT79nIdSQ0BVUA+YsWuqPWYQhnXWS5XEXJNXKoDT2ztPQae xDHNfkZZQGeHPkPI7wDa+2f6xeNUT494BjF2gy80uRMpWSyROouB+S9ZsAp40ulfbCo2F/H7gIjH dLqDh8L7lriDYXJ6dXWYyr2tJd5o58RryjeY2dKlevylRoQJbp0bQqenh+RKuQR3/3TLL3Ebd7Gt E+YOBBXSiTJd3laTrntIoeRv4RnNm2LSRlNmCnmV4rtsYxh9Ax72tAWMm6jcn2y5mNC7/LDCNL3R QqlNmeU3s2ecC2DgkVI6iHU87UdL0ftlfOGJIXfOFM6IzAEJa/UzZsNYxaEhI2rkYZ1Pq0E6uyDO 4La9gYctNlgWjUEXnQliaiymwaoCLMcL9o0e2sb2OQCXm2jl4aqcUa8zGVldwmoDHQwB9dVJHxrC OO0HR0Qct2KWDWpnwtx75K3varfM8D+2ahjqUdrZI7DFqGZwDePB9aZg5Qb/R+zrIJ07BaxxKvwx Cc4UqPzcn6+HtCQ4JtmzilfRoELyX75guoKxN0KP50bRmr2DNi1YnEqf3gfXgO3hTev4yaFGpDs9 dcOmjF+EkiL8vE5VzcohZwvHLXgHpyuTXbp21vyNCU/w80JyzgF08W/MlMM4CANFZiWg2aMKZW5k c3RyZWFtIAplbmRvYmogCjE1IDAgb2JqIAo8PAovUiAzCi9QIC0zOTA0Ci9PICgAipiBEfxQ24FW VzndqI/5835cdFxiAVIByiJpRB1gqFZNKQovRmlsdGVyIC9TdGFuZGFyZAovTGVuZ3RoIDEyOAov ViAyCi9VICi/ZOQk8iyE8hj2UjvNgjm0AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACkKPj4KZW5kb2JqIAoxNiAw IG9iaiAKPDwKL1RpdGxlIChBUVwoTYNhqx3e67YzmpHsn5G9ndwumafQYGqkdE41G0qjPozAJC3X T45ooNlBH4hXxK9cZtXuZnhRg9Q22Gk7ZEF410BB/bNiSZ0zNv4vVYDKa1A0n5uQNUfpWRlmHq3n UlxuC6iU5UAXmjUaJYLSSl5htbPrpn0gKQovUHJvZHVjZXIgKFhVIRiWcLkd0q6mfICNqYWCrsnY IJOnzHFkoHRTJlx0Suozjdd9bNVL3H62nVxiGYkFkKpcbsvuYW4G0MxcKcxjJTBHaJIBUea2IVqQ KirgM1WA12tzPYSTkyNJKQovQ3JlYXRpb25EYXRlIChOXG5jXdIi60SHtvQj2874wSkKPj4KZW5k b2JqIHhyZWYKMCAxNwowMDAwMDAwMDAwIDY1NTM1IGYgCjAwMDAwMDAwMTUgMDAwMDAgbiAKMDAw MDAwMDA2NiAwMDAwMCBuIAowMDAwMDAwMzIxIDAwMDAwIG4gCjAwMDAwMDE3NjUgMDAwMDAgbiAK MDAwMDAwMjg4MyAwMDAwMCBuIAowMDAwMDA2NjM0IDAwMDAwIG4gCjAwMDAwMTA0NTIgMDAwMDAg biAKMDAwMDAwMDE3MyAwMDAwMCBuIAowMDAwMDAwMjUzIDAwMDAwIG4gCjAwMDAwMDA0MjggMDAw MDAgbiAKMDAwMDAwMTg3MiAwMDAwMCBuIAowMDAwMDAyOTkwIDAwMDAwIG4gCjAwMDAwMDY3NDEg MDAwMDAgbiAKMDAwMDAxMDU1OSAwMDAwMCBuIAowMDAwMDExNTg3IDAwMDAwIG4gCjAwMDAwMTE3 MzggMDAwMDAgbiAKdHJhaWxlcgoKPDwKL0VuY3J5cHQgMTUgMCBSCi9JbmZvIDE2IDAgUgovUm9v dCAxIDAgUgovU2l6ZSAxNwovSUQgWzw0MTY3ZTQ3MDQzODk1YWJiMGQ4OTdjOTdlNDQwYTcyMj48 N2FiMjRhODg0OWEwY2VmYTFmNjFhZTVkZWYyMzZlMWI+XQo+PgpzdGFydHhyZWYKMTIwMzEKJSVF T0YK ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C806A1.7C24B1A0-- From FaustinoexplicableKinney@43people.com Thu Oct 04 10:28:25 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdRgf-0008AK-NM for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 10:28:25 -0400 Received: from [201.151.220.206] (helo=n8ba31f64d1054.alestra.net.mx) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdRgf-0000l2-C1 for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 10:28:25 -0400 Received: from neil by 43people.com with SMTP id 27OsUXKTvL for ; Thu, 4 Oct 2007 09:26:54 +0600 From: "Odis Burris" To: Subject: If you're in the US or anywhere else, join your new casino paradise. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.1 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Play your favorite games from the comfort of your home, USA players ARE included! We're serious about fun. How about the best service around? We're serious about fun. http://trynetgambling.net/ From zowquebsur@queb.org Thu Oct 04 16:08:41 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdWzw-0001SK-Le; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 16:08:40 -0400 Received: from host7.zabki.net.pl ([62.29.136.7] helo=cache.zabki.net.pl) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdWzk-0006Ab-JB; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 16:08:35 -0400 Received: from [62.29.136.7] by mx.inode.at; Thu, 4 Oct 2007 14:19:02 +0100 Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2007 14:19:02 +0100 From: "Juan Parr" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.62.03) Professional Reply-To: zowquebsur@queb.org X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <559730029.69507289347834@queb.org> To: 6lowpan@lists.ietf.org Subject: Legal software sales MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----------211119576E0C38" X-Spam-Score: 1.9 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 3e15cc4fdc61d7bce84032741d11c8e5 ------------211119576E0C38 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Our goal is to present low cost PC and Macintosh legal software and computer solutions for anyone. Whether you are a corporate buyer, an owner of small enterprise, or shopping for your own PC, we think that we'll help you. TAKE BENEFIT OF OUR PRODUCTS http://fjiftyg.realsoftdirect.com/ Most popular software in sight are: *Macromedia Captivate v1.0: Retail price this time - $499.00; Our this time only - $39.95 *Corel Procreate KPT Effects: Retail price this time - $199.00; Our now just - $19.95 *Autodesk 3ds Max 8.0: Retail price for this day - $3495.00; Our just - $149.95 *Adobe InDesign CS2: Retail price for today - $699.00; Our just for this day - $59.95 *Macromedia Studio 8: Retail price now - $999.00; Our only - $99.95 *Macromedia Director MX 2004 for Mac: Retail price for this day - $1199.00; Our just - $49.95 *Microsoft Windows 2003 Enterprise Server: Retail price this day - $800.00; Our just - $69.95 *Adobe After Effects 7.0 Standard: Retail price this time - $999.00; Our today - $59.95 COME IN JUST NOW! http://fjiftyg.realsoftdirect.com/ ------------211119576E0C38 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Our goal is to present low cost PC and Macintosh legal software and computer solutions for anyone.
Whether you are a corporate buyer, an owner of small enterprise,
or shopping for your own PC, we think that we'll help you.
TAKE BENEFIT OF OUR PRODUCTS

http://fjiftyg.realsoftdirect.com/
Most popular software in sight are:
*Macromedia Captivate v1.0: Retail price this time - $499.00; Our this time only - $39.95
*Corel Procreate KPT Effects: Retail price this time - $199.00; Our now just - $19.95
*Autodesk 3ds Max 8.0: Retail price for this day - $3495.00; Our just - $149.95
*Adobe InDesign CS2: Retail price for today - $699.00; Our just for this day - $59.95
*Macromedia Studio 8: Retail price now - $999.00; Our only - $99.95
*Macromedia Director MX 2004 for Mac: Retail price for this day - $1199.00; Our just - $49.95
*Microsoft Windows 2003 Enterprise Server: Retail price this day - $800.00; Our just - $69.95
*Adobe After Effects 7.0 Standard: Retail price this time - $999.00; Our today - $59.95
COME IN JUST NOW!
http://fjiftyg.realsoftdirect.com/ ------------211119576E0C38-- From some86tiffany@bazarov.net Thu Oct 04 20:08:08 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Idajg-00063i-S7 for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 20:08:08 -0400 Received: from pool-96-232-179-128.nycmny.fios.verizon.net ([96.232.179.128]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdajW-0007cl-1Y for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 20:08:04 -0400 Received: from [96.232.179.128] by lpntfvq.bazarov.net; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 00:07:57 +0000 Message-ID: <000701c806e3$01c8e1bc$667586be@jwxjna> From: "brandy chia" To: "Marquis Reese" Subject: Cocktail party Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2007 22:20:35 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0004_01C806E3.01C732CD" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.2663 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.2757 X-Spam-Score: 4.6 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: f4c2cf0bccc868e4cc88dace71fb3f44 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01C806E3.01C732CD Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, Life Should be Full of Luxuries, yet, only a handful of people can = afford the finest products, the luxuries of the elite. We are committed to bringing you the finest products, at prices = incomparably lower. Perfectly crafted luxury timepieces, all at = affordable prices. Thousands of different models to choose from! http://razluxury.com.cn/ The finest of products, at the lowest of prices: http://razluxury.com.cn/=20 Sincerely, derrin randal ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01C806E3.01C732CD Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello,

Life Should be Full of Luxuries, yet, only a handful of people can = afford the finest products,=20 the luxuries of the elite.
We are committed to bringing you the = finest products, at prices=20 incomparably lower. Perfectly crafted luxury timepieces, all at = affordable prices. Thousands=20 of different models to choose from!


http://razluxury.com.cn/

The = finest of products, at the lowest of prices:

http://razluxury.com.cn/ =


Sincerely,
derrin randal ------=_NextPart_000_0004_01C806E3.01C732CD-- From DarylworthyRhodes@spearsmfg.com Thu Oct 04 21:48:29 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdcIn-0003ZH-IB for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 21:48:29 -0400 Received: from [72.171.198.74] (helo=compu1) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdcIj-0008MO-Si for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 21:48:29 -0400 Received: from extensive by spearsmfg.com with SMTP id lVldgbSamK for ; Wed, 3 Oct 2007 19:43:10 +0600 From: "Enrique Bates" To: Subject: How about a $2400 welcome bonus Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.1 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Play your favorite games from the comfort of your home, USA players ARE included! When YOU WIN, we win! We have it all! Get your bonus and walk the red carpet to winnings and fun. http://vegasgamecity.net/ From RosemaryshrubHaines@collegehumor.com Fri Oct 05 01:42:48 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdfxY-0002PC-Di for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 01:42:48 -0400 Received: from c-76-98-193-139.hsd1.nj.comcast.net ([76.98.193.139] helo=centh03685.centenarycollege.edu) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdfxL-0006ma-OT for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 01:42:35 -0400 Received: from safety by collegehumor.com with SMTP id uFrwUuG164 for ; Fri, 5 Oct 2007 01:44:02 +0500 From: "Tonya Mcdermott" To: Subject: We're serious about fun. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.1 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Your own privater Vegas! Come find out. Play your favorite games from the comfort of your home, USA players ARE included! We're serious about fun. http://netcasinocenter.net/ From gepraytexdyk@raytex.com Fri Oct 05 04:15:02 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdiKr-0001nr-Hu; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 04:15:01 -0400 Received: from [88.231.55.82] (helo=[88.231.55.82]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdiKl-0003vl-Jy; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 04:14:57 -0400 Received: from [88.231.55.82] by mail.raytex.com; Fri, 5 Oct 2007 03:21:08 +0200 Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 03:21:08 +0200 From: "Jeri Brand" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v2.00.18) Personal Reply-To: gepraytexdyk@raytex.com X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <265936190.65979580207752@raytex.com> To: 6lowpan@lists.ietf.org Subject: Doctors and Celebrities endorse Anatrim MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----------094DA525252C6731" X-Spam-Score: 4.3 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: b280b4db656c3ca28dd62e5e0b03daa8 ------------094DA525252C6731 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Anatrim - The up-to-the-moment and most delighting product for weighty people is now available - As could be seen on BBC Do you see redundant body kilos kill a plenty of people every year? We believe you hate the unsightly look of people like those and the low status they have in modern society. Moreover, you've not the will to withstand a siege of fatal eating habits of yours. Does it sound familiar? Then we have something for you! Here there is Anatrim, the recent product for the reduction of your body's extra weight. The astounding thing about Anatrim is it raises the quality of your life, repressing the feeling of hunger and giving you better spirit. Read some e-mails from our customers: "It’s outstanding! Instead of eating anything close at hand and watching TV continually I became more interested in exercise. Anatrim made me stride on confidently. I feel fit now and there are lots of men following me with their eyes!" Silvia D., Bellevue WA "Passive weight losing was of little help to me. I could not restrain my ravenous appetite. One day I heard about Anatrim in the media and I was really effected at the information. I had tried to take it, and my wife said that I'm a different person now, 4 months later. 29 pounds off and it’s still far to an end! And you know, the bedroom thing is cool, too." Michael Burns, Bellevue WA Anatrim helps you to realize you don't need that much food. It raises your spirit up, gives you energy, and attacks useless kilos. Especial thanks to its mighty original formula!! Find out latest news on this great product now! http://www.souwpor.biz/?vngyqkzcv ------------094DA525252C6731 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Anatrim - The up-to-the-moment and most delighting product for weighty people is now available - As could be seen on BBC
Do you see redundant body kilos kill a plenty of people every year? We believe you hate the unsightly look of people like those and the low status they have in modern society. Moreover, you've not the will to withstand a siege of fatal eating habits of yours. Does it sound familiar? Then we have something for you!

Here there is Anatrim, the recent product for the reduction of your body's extra weight. The astounding thing about Anatrim is it raises the quality of your life, repressing the feeling of hunger and giving you better spirit. Read some e-mails from our customers:

"It’s outstanding! Instead of eating anything close at hand and watching TV continually I became more interested in exercise. Anatrim made me stride on confidently. I feel fit now and there are lots of men following me with their eyes!"

Silvia D., Bellevue WA

"Passive weight losing was of little help to me. I could not restrain my ravenous appetite. One day I heard about Anatrim in the media and I was really effected at the information. I had tried to take it, and my wife said that I'm a different person now, 4 months later. 29 pounds off and it’s still far to an end! And you know, the bedroom thing is cool, too."

Michael Burns, Bellevue WA

Anatrim helps you to realize you don't need that much food. It raises your spirit up, gives you energy, and attacks useless kilos. Especial thanks to its mighty original formula!!
Find out latest news on this great product now!

http://www.souwpor.biz/?vngyqkzcv ------------094DA525252C6731-- From pmorard@frog.co.uk Fri Oct 05 06:02:45 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Idk17-0002ck-Ku for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 06:02:45 -0400 Received: from 001-718-469.area1.spcsdns.net ([68.26.30.168]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Idk0v-0006zZ-DD for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 06:02:40 -0400 Received: from oze ([198.175.172.150]) by 001-718-469.area1.spcsdns.net (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id l95A3bw9063943; Fri, 5 Oct 2007 04:03:37 -0600 Message-ID: <000b01c80736$d48b5a70$96acafc6@oze> From: To: Subject: Investment alert Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 04:02:25 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1506 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1506 X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 30ac594df0e66ffa5a93eb4c48bcb014 Fearless Yachts take off as investors jump for joy. FEARLESS INTL INC (FRLE) $0.25 UP 31.51 % Insightful investors are filled with glee, as week long heavy trading pays off with huge returns. These kind of numbers draw a crowd and tomorrow this will begin exploding. This is one alert you need to act on. From wxqsmell@ttinet.com Fri Oct 05 07:21:41 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdlFV-0001c3-1f; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 07:21:41 -0400 Received: from [85.90.116.250] (helo=ttinet.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdlFM-0001Rx-KX; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 07:21:39 -0400 Received: from NargizaComp ([90.222.12.82]:5448 "HELO NargizaComp" smtp-auth: TLS-CIPHER: TLS-PEER-CN1: ) by fa745a55ttinet.com with ESMTP id t9OZMMLJ083527 (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Oct 2007 15:21:32 +0400 Message-ID: <001201c80763$692665e0$064af10c@NargizaComp> From: words go To: imapext-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: tclear Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 15:21:32 +0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000F_01C80763.692665E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1081 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.2969 X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 9ed51c9d1356100bce94f1ae4ec616a9 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C80763.692665E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable : elaborate and painstaking make -up, photo manipulation through possibly destroying the environment and pristine wilderness future, I fear = to question..? If technology dominates the medium ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C80763.692665E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

individual designer and his/her original vision. The fact is if

Are you wanting a bigger p_ e >n _is?

As se -e -n on TV

Over 722,000 Men around the world are already satisfied
Gain 3+ Inches In Leng _th
Increase Your P _en -is Wi _dth (Girth) By up _to 29%
100% Safe To Take, With NO Side Effects
No Pu _mps! No Sur _gery! No Exercises!
*3 F _REE Bottles

Design/Drafting application. The AutoCad design package is a
------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C80763.692665E0-- From Hoa405@philwilliams.demon.co.uk Fri Oct 05 08:17:43 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Idm7j-0008FT-Am for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:17:43 -0400 Received: from 85-95-166-8.saransk.ru ([85.95.166.8]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Idm7U-0002F2-Vc for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:17:33 -0400 Received: from PKD_ADM ([134.152.79.134]:21494 "EHLO PKD_ADM" smtp-auth: TLS-CIPHER: TLS-PEER-CN1: ) by 85-95-166-8.saransk.ru with ESMTP id S22PYFANWXUAMWGC (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Oct 2007 16:17:35 +0400 Message-ID: <000e01c80749$b05d2300$08a65f55@PKDADM> From: "Hoa Cage" To: Subject: 7475-924 Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 16:17:25 +0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0008_01C8076B.376EC300" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 X-Spam-Score: 4.1 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: b19722fc8d3865b147c75ae2495625f2 ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C8076B.376EC300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="koi8-r" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable http://snaoontool.com/ Whats up ipsec-archive After only 2 weeks of use I have noticed a amazing difference in girth Hoa Cage ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C8076B.376EC300 Content-Type: text/html; charset="koi8-r" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Whats up ipsec-archive
After only 2 weeks of use I have noticed a = amazing=20 difference in girth
Hoa Cage
------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C8076B.376EC300-- From ElizaturfEddy@switchboard.com Fri Oct 05 09:41:00 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdnQK-00051r-A1 for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 09:41:00 -0400 Received: from [189.170.40.245] (helo=familia9mvy7ut.gateway.2wire.net) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdnQJ-0005JV-TF for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 09:41:00 -0400 Received: from exclusion by switchboard.com with SMTP id NvzRVFs8HB for ; Fri, 5 Oct 2007 07:39:28 +0600 From: "Simone Dugan" To: Subject: Hey, start seeing dollars pouring in. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.1 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Get to know your new casino home! Relax and have fun with poker, blackjack, roulette, progressive video slots at your own leisure from your couch. Huge progressive jackpots, slots, multi-hand, and single-hand blackjack. Huge progressive jackpots, slots, multi-hand, and single-hand blackjack. http://trynetgambling.net/ From ebooking@quatech.com Fri Oct 05 10:42:44 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdoO4-0002Qa-M6; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 10:42:44 -0400 Received: from giszowiec.pl ([80.55.225.42]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdoO2-0007Ql-2X; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 10:42:42 -0400 Received: from krecik ([62.206.83.156]:31032 "HELO krecik" smtp-auth: TLS-CIPHER: TLS-PEER-CN1: ) by 2ae13750quatech.com with ESMTP id 7362894F2A91 (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Oct 2007 16:44:05 +0200 Message-ID: <001a01c8076e$f14ecf10$00d1f834@krecik> From: vitamin is To: ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: No futures Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 16:44:05 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0017_01C8076E.F14ECF10" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.181 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2720.2962 X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 9ed51c9d1356100bce94f1ae4ec616a9 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C8076E.F14ECF10 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable give scientists the observational advantage without the lengthy screen. I do not feel in any way, that if accomplished by hand and having a= ccess to new tools. Not to worry I don't plan to ------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C8076E.F14ECF10 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

increased rate of miscarriages.Brodeur, Paul, Currents of Death:

Are you wanting a bigger p_ e >n _is?

As se -e -n on TV

Over 791,000 Men around the world are already satisfied
Gain 3+ Inches In Leng _th
Increase Your P _en -is Wi _dth (Girth) By up _to 23%
100% Safe To Take, With NO Side Effects
No Pu _mps! No Sur _gery! No Exercises!
*3 F _REE Bottles

English in the matter of seconds by the tap of a finger. Voice
------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C8076E.F14ECF10-- From hek@austincancercenters.com Fri Oct 05 11:27:15 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Idp59-0002Mj-La for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 11:27:15 -0400 Received: from host123-96-static.107-82-b.business.telecomitalia.it ([82.107.96.123]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Idp52-000082-9j for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 11:27:10 -0400 Received: by 10.104.46.196 with SMTP id YOHEunMPxJsnz; Fri, 5 Oct 2007 17:27:30 +0200 (GMT) Received: by 192.168.120.233 with SMTP id vlgcMKbUGOYNPI.3108974205217; Fri, 5 Oct 2007 17:27:28 +0200 (GMT) Message-ID: <000e01c80764$3b3a0000$7b606b52@pczy07hqjka7h1> From: "hek keckaroski" To: Subject: rtesanry Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 17:27:25 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01C80774.FEC2D000" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 000778-4, 05/10/2007), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Scan-Signature: b19722fc8d3865b147c75ae2495625f2 ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C80774.FEC2D000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable http://www.suavehair.com/ Nice to meet you ipsec-archive Rock-solid erections that feel bigger, wider and fuller hek keckaroski ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C80774.FEC2D000 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
http://www.suavehair.com/
Nice to meet you ipsec-archive
Rock-solid erections that feel bigger, wider = and fuller
hek keckaroski
------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C80774.FEC2D000-- From FannylinemenHemphill@flickr.com Fri Oct 05 11:46:36 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdpNr-0002A5-2R for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 11:46:35 -0400 Received: from [200.106.85.22] (helo=empresarial) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdpNq-0000lJ-ML for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 11:46:34 -0400 Received: from jitter by flickr.com with SMTP id xasGOyCNyp for ; Fri, 5 Oct 2007 10:45:37 +0500 From: "Rowena Call" To: Subject: Get $2400 welcome bonus Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.1 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Visit and start seeing the dollars coming. Win $$$ instead of throwing it all away at other casinos. Our casino is for you and everyone else who likes to win! Our safe, secure games will get you smiling when you start seeing dollars pouring in. http://trynetgambling.net/ From edu_ead01@qaulcomm.com Fri Oct 05 14:45:43 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdsBD-0005F4-Px for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 14:45:43 -0400 Received: from [190.25.144.79] (helo=corporat190-025144079.sta.etb.net.co) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdsAz-0008NE-3n for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 14:45:30 -0400 Received: from fahve ([92.210.116.207]) by corporat190-025144079.sta.etb.net.co (8.13.3/8.13.3) with SMTP id l95ImiYi011787; Fri, 5 Oct 2007 13:48:44 -0500 Message-ID: <4706861D.3000703@qaulcomm.com> Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 13:44:45 -0500 From: User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Tidal Wave is coming Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Look out investors here comes fearless, Up over 30%. Fearless International Inc. (F R L E . O B) $0.25 UP 31.54 % This is starting to climb hard as shares jumped a whopping 31.58% today alone. Today's trading and huge increases will certainly make for a much bigger day tomorrow. There will be no stopping this now, get in first thing Friday. From buchmann28@ledecns.cz Sat Oct 06 00:11:17 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ie10X-0005Hd-Ms for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2007 00:11:17 -0400 Received: from ds81-30-216-215.ufanet.ru ([81.30.216.215]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ie10M-00080K-3h for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2007 00:11:12 -0400 Received: from aalx ([97.80.148.226]) by ds81-30-216-215.ufanet.ru (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id l965EPHJ022030; Sat, 6 Oct 2007 10:14:25 +0500 Message-ID: <000601c807d7$5671a2b0$e2945061@aalx> From: To: Subject: Re: your decision Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2007 10:11:22 +0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="windows-1250"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Spam-Score: 2.7 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 30ac594df0e66ffa5a93eb4c48bcb014 FRLE takes its investors on a ride to the bank. Fearless International (F r L E) $0.21 Fearless International goes into over drive as Market makers move in to grab their piece. This is just the warm up. FRLE is where it's at Monday Morning. From GaledependentAbernathy@5thirtyone.com Sat Oct 06 02:03:46 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ie2lO-0006CT-5x for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2007 02:03:46 -0400 Received: from cpe-76-170-42-99.socal.res.rr.com ([76.170.42.99] helo=dk.socal.rr.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ie2lJ-0002Ob-Rt for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2007 02:03:42 -0400 Received: from millennia by 5thirtyone.com with SMTP id W45nPQqHYI for ; Sat, 6 Oct 2007 23:02:38 +0800 From: "Dee Abernathy" To: Subject: How about a $2400 welcome bonus Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.1 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de We pay you to play. We give out BONUSES to anyone who joins. Our casino is for you and everyone else who likes to win! When YOU WIN, we win! http://silvercitygaming.net/ From daisycantu@job-at.com Sat Oct 06 09:18:01 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ie9Xd-0007Ot-NG; Sat, 06 Oct 2007 09:18:01 -0400 Received: from [59.7.39.101] (helo=job-at.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ie9XQ-00050Z-7f; Sat, 06 Oct 2007 09:17:54 -0400 From: "daisycantu@job-at.com" To: Cc: , Subject: This Watch is wondrous Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2007 06:43:30 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit boundary="--AKGECO88524" X-Spam-Score: 3.0 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: d17f825e43c9aed4fd65b7edddddec89 I just got my wife a Bvlgari watch and she really loves it. I can't afford to spend $30 000 on a watch for her, though I would love to; but this did the trick. It looks exactly like the real thing and she's actually glad I didn't spend $30 000 on a watch but saved $29 750 instead. This turned out perfect guys, thanks for providing such a great product, with such great prices. This was a great experience ordering from your company. - Bart Just Visit http://www.suewywtt.com No longer recieve these messages http://www.suewywtt.com/remove From gilrockracingfow@rockracing.com Sat Oct 06 10:02:44 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IeAEu-0002LW-Ad; Sat, 06 Oct 2007 10:02:44 -0400 Received: from [85.103.71.33] (helo=[85.103.71.33]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IeAEq-0005w8-Cc; Sat, 06 Oct 2007 10:02:42 -0400 Received: from [85.103.71.33] by MAIL.rockracing.com; Sat, 6 Oct 2007 09:09:01 +0200 Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2007 09:09:01 +0200 From: "Loren Henderson" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.80.06) Home Reply-To: gilrockracingfow@rockracing.com X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <201861864.99600921806031@rockracing.com> To: 6lowpan@lists.ietf.org Subject: Summer is coming, time to tone up MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----------5DA98F4DA14677" X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 31247fb3be228bb596db9127becad0bc ------------5DA98F4DA14677 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Take advantage of your chance! - Anatrim - The very up-to-date & most attracting lose flesh product is now easily available - As were seen on Oprah Can you count up all the times when you told yourself you would do anything for being delivered from this terrible number of lbs? Happily, now no great offering is necessary. With Anatrim, the earth-shaking, you can achieve healthier life style and a really slender figure. Just look at what customers say! "I always had a stunning life until a year back my girlfriend told me I was plump and had need for keeping eye on my health. My life was never the same after that, till I disclosed Anatrim. After getting rid of more than 18 kilogrammes only thanx to Anatrim, my private life has come back, better than before even. A plenty of thanx for the incredible stuff and the first-class maintenance service. Keep up the helpful action!" Charley Mock, Las Vegas "There's nothing better than slipping into a bikini I haven't been dressed in for many years. I feel svelte, steadfast, and strong, thanx to a great extent to Anatrim! Thank you so much!" Maria H., Bellevue WA Check out Anatrim, and you will join the worldwide association of thousands of happy buyers who are enjoying the revolutionary effects of Anatrim just now. Less gobbling madness, less lbs and more festivity in your life! Click here to look at unbeatable Anatrim bargain we're so proud to propose!!! http://www.jurnaqu.com/?ysrxyvsehap ------------5DA98F4DA14677 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Take advantage of your chance! - Anatrim - The very up-to-date & most attracting lose flesh product is now easily available - As were seen on Oprah

Can you count up all the times when you told yourself you would do anything for being delivered from this terrible number of lbs? Happily, now no great offering is necessary. With Anatrim, the earth-shaking, you can achieve healthier life style and a really slender figure. Just look at what customers say!

"I always had a stunning life until a year back my girlfriend told me I was plump and had need for keeping eye on my health. My life was never the same after that, till I disclosed Anatrim. After getting rid of more than 18 kilogrammes only thanx to Anatrim, my private life has come back, better than before even. A plenty of thanx for the incredible stuff and the first-class maintenance service. Keep up the helpful action!"
Charley Mock, Las Vegas

"There's nothing better than slipping into a bikini I haven't been dressed in for many years. I feel svelte, steadfast, and strong, thanx to a great extent to Anatrim! Thank you so much!"
Maria H., Bellevue WA

Check out Anatrim, and you will join the worldwide association of thousands of happy buyers who are enjoying the revolutionary effects of Anatrim just now. Less gobbling madness, less lbs and more festivity in your life!

Click here to look at unbeatable Anatrim bargain we're so proud to propose!!!

http://www.jurnaqu.com/?ysrxyvsehap ------------5DA98F4DA14677-- From Ostarticki@hilaturasjorda.com Sat Oct 06 11:30:53 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IeBcD-0004M1-Gm for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2007 11:30:53 -0400 Received: from [78.16.7.104] (helo=[212.2.176.75]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IeBc6-0007zm-3f for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2007 11:30:48 -0400 Received: from YOUR-CD6095B7D5 ([136.180.25.55] helo=YOUR-CD6095B7D5) by [78.16.92.21] ( sendmail 8.13.3/8.13.1) with esmtpa id 1zgCKI-000TAI-Ch for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 6 Oct 2007 16:31:05 +0100 Message-ID: <000c01c8082d$dc119730$155c104e@YOURCD6095B7D5> From: "Cody Ostarticki" To: Subject: tekatuor Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2007 16:30:43 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01C80836.3DD5FF30" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 X-Spam-Score: 4.5 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: b19722fc8d3865b147c75ae2495625f2 ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C80836.3DD5FF30 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable http://www.misohahne.com/ Hi there ipsec-archive how do you measure up to other men? Cody Ostarticki ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C80836.3DD5FF30 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
http://www.misohahne.com/
Hi there ipsec-archive
how do you measure up to other = men?
Cody Ostarticki
------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C80836.3DD5FF30-- From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Sat Oct 06 15:59:28 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IeFdI-0001iD-30; Sat, 06 Oct 2007 15:48:16 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IeFdG-0001Zb-QW for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2007 15:48:14 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IeFdG-00019Z-ET for ipsec@ietf.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2007 15:48:14 -0400 Received: from doyle.shelfari.com ([208.115.97.232]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IeFd8-0005xP-Uv for ipsec@ietf.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2007 15:48:07 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; q=dns; s=key1; d=shelfari.com; b=2/yhwuVzTsBNl1AwQ6SwC5oZF8qzv3xqBhI5Zee9GRfE4k9bxQwymfKHFfMB+4hTolwufBSw2Qd0 eT/J701geA==; x-sender-override: invitations@shelfari.com mime-version: 1.0 from: rohitvarun to: ipsec date: 6 Oct 2007 12:47:45 -0700 X-Spam-Score: 1.8 (+) X-Scan-Signature: c1c65599517f9ac32519d043c37c5336 Message-Id: Subject: [IPsec] Do we like the same books? X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2140125696==" Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org --===============2140125696== content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary=--boundary_102495_62a6327d-8a3d-4fb4-946f-679d58b53ea8 ----boundary_102495_62a6327d-8a3d-4fb4-946f-679d58b53ea8 content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable I just joined Shelfari to connect with other book lovers. Come see the books= I love and see if we have any in common. Then pick my next book so I can= keep on reading.=0A=0AClick below to join my group of friends on Shelfari!= =0A=0Ahttp://www.shelfari.com/Register.aspx?ActivityId=3D23249542&InvitationCode=3D67382559-5505-4025-b5ba-206529d95ad0= =0A=0Arohitvarun=0A=0AShelfari is a free site that lets you share book ratings= and reviews with friends and meet people who have similar tastes in books.= It also lets you build an online bookshelf, join book clubs, and get good= book recommendations from friends. You should check it out.=0A=0A--------= =0A=0AYou have received this email because rohitvarun (rohit.varun@gmail.com)= directly invited you to join his/her community on Shelfari.=0A=0AIt is= against Shelfari's policies to invite people who you don't know directly.= Follow this link (http://www.shelfari.com/actions/emailoptout.aspx?email=3Dipsec@ietf.org&activityid=3D23249542)= to prevent future invitations to this address. If you believe you do not= know this person, you may view (http://www.shelfari.com/rohitvarun) his/her= Shelfari page or report him/her in our feedback (http://www.shelfari.com/Feedback.aspx)= section.=0A=0AShelfari, 616 1st Ave #300, Seattle, WA 98104=0A ----boundary_102495_62a6327d-8a3d-4fb4-946f-679d58b53ea8 content-type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable =0A= =0A

I just joined Shelfari to connect with other book lovers. Come see= the books I love and see if we have any in common. Then pick my next book= so I can keep on reading.

=0A=0A

Click below to join my group of friends= on Shelfari!

=0A=0A

http://www.shelfari.com/

= =0A=0A

rohitvarun

=0A
=0A

Shelfari= is a free site that lets you share book ratings and reviews with friends= and meet people who have similar tastes in books. It also lets you build= an online bookshelf, join book clubs, and get good book recommendations= from friends. You should check it out.

=0A=0A

= =0A You have received this email because rohitvarun (rohit.varun@gmail.com)= directly invited you to join his/her community on Shelfari.
=0A =
=0A It is against Shelfari's policies to invite people who you= don't know directly. =0A Follow this link to prevent= future invitations to this address.=0A If you believe you do not know= this person, you may view= his/her Shelfari page or report him/her in our =0A feedback= section.
=0A
=0A Shelfari, 616 1st Ave #300, Seattle,= WA 98104=0A

=0A=0A ----boundary_102495_62a6327d-8a3d-4fb4-946f-679d58b53ea8-- --===============2140125696== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec --===============2140125696==-- From suratdav@bonhote.ch Sun Oct 07 06:21:58 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IeTGo-0004qa-2U for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sun, 07 Oct 2007 06:21:58 -0400 Received: from [201.166.36.51] (helo=afotp) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IeTGk-00038D-I7 for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sun, 07 Oct 2007 06:21:56 -0400 Received: (qmail 29426 invoked from network); Sun, 7 Oct 2007 03:21:38 -0700 Received: from unknown (HELO qzhsa) (217.227.113.80) by afotp with SMTP; Sun, 7 Oct 2007 03:21:38 -0700 Message-ID: <001c01c808cb$d8895000$5071e3d9@qzhsa> From: To: Subject: Check this out Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2007 03:21:38 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 30ac594df0e66ffa5a93eb4c48bcb014 Big Day For FRLE FEARLESS INTL INC (F r L E) $0.21 This one is moving fast as the word is out on this hot new company. Now this is getting hot, and the coming week will be incredible. We're going places with FRLE on Monday. From violeta-mortola@asian-fucking.com Mon Oct 08 03:24:59 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iemz4-0006Yt-Us for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 08 Oct 2007 03:24:58 -0400 Received: from marelli-bck1.rgzgroup.com ([85.36.249.26]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iemyo-0004Qx-Oe for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 08 Oct 2007 03:24:44 -0400 Received: from RIC0300283 ([183.189.21.67] helo=RIC0300283) by marelli-bck1.rgzgroup.com ( sendmail 8.13.3/8.13.1) with esmtpa id 1wCNxt-000XBE-iD for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 8 Oct 2007 09:25:17 +0200 Message-ID: <000d01c8097c$4bbbc250$1af92455@RIC0300283> From: "violeta mortola" To: Subject: iarelag' Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 09:24:43 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01C8098D.0F449250" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Scan-Signature: bb8f917bb6b8da28fc948aeffb74aa17 ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C8098D.0F449250 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable http://www.porterro.com/ Hi there ipsec-archive What do women really want? a small 5 incher or a big 8 incher? 8 inch of = course violeta mortola ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C8098D.0F449250 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
http://www.porterro.com/
Hi there ipsec-archive
What do women really want? a small 5 incher or = a big 8=20 incher? 8 inch of course
violeta mortola
------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C8098D.0F449250-- From phbn@tankindustry.com Mon Oct 08 14:10:42 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iex3y-0007lW-VH for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 08 Oct 2007 14:10:42 -0400 Received: from [222.119.236.102] (helo=fngvq) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iex3j-00085z-5G for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 08 Oct 2007 14:10:31 -0400 Received: (qmail 24314 invoked from network); Tue, 9 Oct 2007 03:09:38 +0900 Received: from unknown (HELO ajbk) (142.172.218.76) by fngvq with SMTP; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 03:09:38 +0900 Message-ID: <002f01c809d6$63d58c90$4cdaac8e@ajbk> From: To: Subject: You see this yet? Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 03:09:38 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="windows-1252"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2578 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2578 X-Spam-Score: 2.8 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Huge news expected on Monday for FRLE. Fearless International Inc. (F R L E . O B) $0.21 All the pieces are falling into place for FRLE. Last weeks trading and huge news expected for Monday has the investor market all in buzz. Do not let your day get away from you, check out all the news on this and move on FRLE first thing. From gifsebastiangamboasyb@sebastiangamboa.com Mon Oct 08 17:04:27 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iezm7-00075K-Ep; Mon, 08 Oct 2007 17:04:27 -0400 Received: from [88.246.193.64] (helo=dsl88-246-49472.ttnet.net.tr) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iezm0-0004fY-GT; Mon, 08 Oct 2007 17:04:23 -0400 Received: from [88.246.193.64] by mail.sebastiangamboa.com; Mon, 8 Oct 2007 16:15:08 +0200 Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 16:15:08 +0200 From: "Alexis Knox" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v2.00.5) Personal Reply-To: gifsebastiangamboasyb@sebastiangamboa.com X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <556410589.15940429424409@sebastiangamboa.com> To: 6lowpan@lists.ietf.org Subject: Customers alert, new pharma site is realised! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----------F840909092CB67" X-Spam-Score: 3.5 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 4adaf050708fb13be3316a9eee889caa ------------F840909092CB67 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1250 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit After all new site is bringing out!!! *Men's Health *Anti-Depressant medicinal preparations *Ache relief *Womenfolk’s health *Anti-diabetics *Blood Pressure/Cholesterol *Anti-Allergic/Asthma remedies *Anti-Acidity As our buyers you can first to anybody try our lovely proposition!! FDA, CPA Verified, Visa ratified. Elicit at once!!! http://alwaysfood.cn/ ------------F840909092CB67 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1250 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit After all new site is bringing out!!!
*Men's Health
*Anti-Depressant medicinal preparations
*Ache relief
*Womenfolk’s health
*Anti-diabetics
*Blood Pressure/Cholesterol
*Anti-Allergic/Asthma remedies
*Anti-Acidity
As our buyers you can first to anybody try our lovely proposition!!
FDA, CPA Verified, Visa ratified.

Elicit at once!!!

http://alwaysfood.cn/ ------------F840909092CB67-- From havreuse@moosepix.com Mon Oct 08 17:39:50 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1If0KM-0006cF-1R; Mon, 08 Oct 2007 17:39:50 -0400 Received: from agu82.internetdsl.tpnet.pl ([83.16.176.82]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1If0KG-0008Ke-9s; Mon, 08 Oct 2007 17:39:44 -0400 Received: from domek ([85.67.46.74]:28151 "HELO domek" smtp-auth: TLS-CIPHER: TLS-PEER-CN1: ) by 52b01053moosepix.com with ESMTP id E28242447480D (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Oct 2007 23:35:28 +0200 Message-ID: <001401c80a03$e8a50e50$068e0ce4@domek> From: Opal To: imapext-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: To be easter Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 23:35:28 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0011_01C80A03.E8A50E50" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.181 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2720.1106 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 21c69d3cfc2dd19218717dbe1d974352 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C80A03.E8A50E50 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable for it's existence - it can retain an identity seperate from the virtual Paul Reveres, the virtual exaggerators, the virtual distinguishing = between real life and fantasy . The bottom line ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C80A03.E8A50E50 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

nuance directly reflects its creator's individual response to the

Are you wanting a bigger p_ e >n _is?

As se _e -n on T _V

Over 793,000 Men around the world are already satisfied
Gain 3+ Inches In Leng _th
Increase Your P _en -is Wi _dth (Girth) By up _to 20%
100% Safe To Take, With NO Side Effects
No Pum _ps! No Su _rgery! No Exercises!
*3 F _RE >E Bottles

schools will be partly financed by local industries that rely on
= ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C80A03.E8A50E50-- From sunremote@deltamarine.com Mon Oct 08 17:43:30 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1If0Nu-0006oi-CY; Mon, 08 Oct 2007 17:43:30 -0400 Received: from [200.61.226.234] (helo=deltamarine.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1If0Nj-0005ly-E8; Mon, 08 Oct 2007 17:43:26 -0400 Received: from jorge ([169.20.97.233]:30073 "HELO jorge" smtp-auth: TLS-CIPHER: TLS-PEER-CN1: ) by eae23dc8deltamarine.com with ESMTP id 8499B259401795 (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Oct 2007 17:43:02 -0400 Message-ID: <001b01c809d2$aced15a0$0703ae6c@jorge> From: chin of To: imapext-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: in made Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 17:43:02 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0018_01C809D2.ACED15A0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.1081 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.0000 X-Spam-Score: 2.6 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 9ed51c9d1356100bce94f1ae4ec616a9 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C809D2.ACED15A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1251" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable for the better or worse. With the acceptance of the INTERNET in advantages of convenience, however, may be in the future this their threat = to your health Luckily, there is an increased ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C809D2.ACED15A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1251" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

dimension of worldly consciousness. Quantum mechanics is busy
=

Are you wanting a bigger p_ e >n _is?

As se _e -n on T _V

Over 782,000 Men around the world are already satisfied
Gain 4+ Inches In Leng _th
Increase Your P _en -is Wi _dth (Girth) By up _to 28%
100% Safe To Take, With NO Side Effects
No Pum _ps! No Su _rgery! No Exercises!
*3 F _RE >E Bottles

View, Then And Now Pics

me that computer. He had said that he was going to upgrade to a
------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C809D2.ACED15A0-- From saxsevereillusiondiw@severeillusion.com Mon Oct 08 19:12:29 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1If1m1-0004Yw-5T; Mon, 08 Oct 2007 19:12:29 -0400 Received: from [200.121.244.87] (helo=client-200.121.244.87.speedy.net.pe) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1If1lo-00086v-AK; Mon, 08 Oct 2007 19:12:18 -0400 Received: from [200.121.244.87] by mail2.surftown.se; Mon, 8 Oct 2007 11:18:53 -0500 Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 11:18:53 -0500 From: "Monica Mendoza" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v2.00.2) Educational Reply-To: saxsevereillusiondiw@severeillusion.com X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <086406577.52411937870305@severeillusion.com> To: 6lowpan@lists.ietf.org Subject: Our present for your health MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----------0CC51A059E829E8" X-Spam-Score: 4.9 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: c1c65599517f9ac32519d043c37c5336 ------------0CC51A059E829E8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1250 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit As our customer you have a chance to examine first to anybody our new page! Only primal high-quality preparations at a price you can afford!! 20% warranted reduction is for you only!!! Read what write our delighted customers: From: Latasha Mitchell Subject: Common thanx! "Thank you very much you gave me festive abatements and your special propositions that save me my bucks and time, offering only cures of maximum quality. You're in my minions, I'll inform about your drug-store without fail all my buddies!" Read some more testimonials at our web site! http://alwaysfood.cn/ ------------0CC51A059E829E8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1250 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit As our customer you have a chance to examine first to anybody our new page!
Only primal high-quality preparations at a price you can afford!!
20% warranted reduction is for you only!!!

Read what write our delighted customers:
From: Latasha Mitchell
Subject:
Common thanx!
"Thank you very much you gave me festive abatements and your special propositions that save me my bucks and time, offering only cures of maximum quality. You're in my minions, I'll inform about your drug-store without fail all my buddies!"

Read some more testimonials at our web site!
http://alwaysfood.cn/ ------------0CC51A059E829E8-- From fresher.astergate@mundivia.es Mon Oct 08 19:20:19 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1If1tb-0008Dp-IT for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 08 Oct 2007 19:20:19 -0400 Received: from [200.24.200.6] (helo=yzadj) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1If1tX-0008It-Hy for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 08 Oct 2007 19:20:17 -0400 Received: from lxg ([81.87.164.150]) by yzadj (8.13.3/8.13.3) with SMTP id l98NLiNH059379; Mon, 8 Oct 2007 18:21:44 -0500 Message-ID: <002901c80a01$b3e42ea0$96a45751@lxg> From: To: Subject: dude, its free Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 18:19:40 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="windows-1250"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 X-Spam-Score: 3.0 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 01485d64dfa90b45a74269b3ca9d5574 Get on board and get all your free games in one place. http://67.175.189.56/ From denise7darcy3@buy999.com Tue Oct 09 07:49:14 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfDaM-0002zu-BY for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 07:49:14 -0400 Received: from [122.2.61.157] (helo=122.2.61.157.pldt.net) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfDaE-0003hK-1g for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 07:49:08 -0400 Received: from [122.2.61.157] by vkkv.buy999.com; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 11:48:49 +0000 Message-ID: <000801c80a6a$07d7c8c0$22b4e597@kkvqrwl> From: "Emery Rich" To: "Everette Dugan" Subject: Fw: Thank you, we are ready to lend some cash Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 10:01:27 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01C80A6A.07D5BDEA" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.2663 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.2757 X-Spam-Score: 2.7 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 4adaf050708fb13be3316a9eee889caa This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C80A6A.07D5BDEA Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable If you have your own business and require IMMEDIATE ready money to spend = ANY way you like or need Extra money to give your business a boost or = need A low interest loan - NO STRINGS ATTACHED, here is best deal we can = offer you TONIGHT (hurry, this lot will expire THIS EVENING):   $34,000+ loan   Hurry, when our deal is gone, it is gone. Simply Call Us Free on=20 877-292-6896 ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C80A6A.07D5BDEA Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
If you have your own business and = require IMMEDIATE ready money to spend ANY way you like or need Extra = money to give your business a boost or need A low interest loan - NO = STRINGS ATTACHED, here is best deal we can offer you TONIGHT (hurry, = this lot will expire THIS EVENING):
=20
 
$34,000+ loan
 
Hurry, when our deal is gone, it is = gone. Simply Call Us Free on 877-292-6896
------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C80A6A.07D5BDEA-- From roschanl@ingvysyalife.com Tue Oct 09 13:06:41 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfIXZ-0005jR-Ia for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 13:06:41 -0400 Received: from [84.36.28.199] (helo=zuit) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfIXS-00054u-HL for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 13:06:36 -0400 Received: from nbxpe ([201.26.136.212]) by zuit (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id l99G47tR010566; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 18:04:07 +0200 Message-ID: <001f01c80a8d$b53deca0$d4881ac9@nbxpe> From: To: Subject: Hot online games, all free. Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 18:01:52 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4131.1600 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4131.1600 X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 01485d64dfa90b45a74269b3ca9d5574 No membership, no tricks, no gimmicks, just 1000 free games. http://168.226.20.112/ From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Tue Oct 09 15:38:27 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfKpK-0004PK-Ih; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 15:33:10 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IfKpJ-0004OQ-5k for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 15:33:09 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfKpI-0004Hv-Pa for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 15:33:08 -0400 Received: from e4.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.144]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfKpG-00045y-Fv for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 15:33:06 -0400 Received: from d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (d01relay02.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.234]) by e4.ny.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l99JX6cF012666 for ; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 15:33:06 -0400 Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (d01av04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.64]) by d01relay02.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.5) with ESMTP id l99JX6eg091552 for ; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 15:33:06 -0400 Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av04.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l99JWtIv019591 for ; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 15:32:55 -0400 Received: from austin.ibm.com (netmail2.austin.ibm.com [9.41.248.176]) by d01av04.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l99JWtLT019029 for ; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 15:32:55 -0400 Received: from faith.austin.ibm.com (faith.austin.ibm.com [9.53.40.35]) by austin.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.12.10) with ESMTP id l99JWjek032582 for ; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 14:32:45 -0500 Received: from faith.austin.ibm.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by faith.austin.ibm.com (8.13.4/8.12.8) with ESMTP id l99JScjg009856 for ; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 14:28:38 -0500 Received: (from jml@localhost) by faith.austin.ibm.com (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id l99JScxx009855 for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 14:28:38 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: faith.austin.ibm.com: jml set sender to latten@austin.ibm.com using -f From: Joy Latten To: ipsec@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 14:28:37 -0500 Message-Id: <1191958117.2477.212.camel@faith.austin.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Subject: [IPsec] PAD and IKEv2 X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org RFC 4301 specifies a Peer Authentication Database. In section 4.4.3.4, it even talks about how IKE is to use the PAD. I see no reference to PAD in RFC 4306 - IKEv2. Is PAD mandatory for 4301 and 4306 conformance? Joy _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Tue Oct 09 16:22:02 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfLXj-0002Wo-Gh; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 16:19:03 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IfLXi-0002Wd-5o for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 16:19:02 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfLXh-0002WV-Sc for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 16:19:01 -0400 Received: from brmea-mail-3.sun.com ([192.18.98.34]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfLXb-0002LY-3Y for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 16:19:01 -0400 Received: from dm-east-01.east.sun.com ([129.148.9.192]) by brmea-mail-3.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l99KIlww024602 for ; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 20:18:47 GMT Received: from kebe.east.sun.com (kebe.East.Sun.COM [129.148.174.48]) by dm-east-01.east.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL, v2.2) with ESMTP id l99KIl23035178 for ; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 16:18:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from kebe.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kebe.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l99K3j8d006257; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 16:03:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from danmcd@localhost) by kebe.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l99K3QsY006256; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 16:03:26 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: kebe.east.sun.com: danmcd set sender to danmcd@sun.com using -f Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 16:03:26 -0400 From: Dan McDonald To: Joy Latten Subject: Re: [IPsec] PAD and IKEv2 Message-ID: <20071009200326.GE6141@kebe.East.Sun.COM> References: <1191958117.2477.212.camel@faith.austin.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1191958117.2477.212.camel@faith.austin.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. - Solaris Networking & Security X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906 Cc: ipsec@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 02:28:37PM -0500, Joy Latten wrote: > RFC 4301 specifies a Peer Authentication Database. s/Authentication/Authorization/ > In section 4.4.3.4, it even talks about how IKE > is to use the PAD. > > I see no reference to PAD in RFC 4306 - IKEv2. > > Is PAD mandatory for 4301 and 4306 conformance? >From my readings, I get the impression that PAD is an IPsec policy (SPD) --> Key Management Policy (configuration + basic acceptance tests) mapping. For example, if you look in ike.config(4) on Solaris or OpenSolaris with the OpenSolaris binary extras, that's a sort of PAD (though not as well mapped as 4301 says). Our ike.config answers questions like, "Which type of IKE authentication should I use or accept?" and, "Do I accept any IKE from addresses in prefix /N?" A more 4301-like PAD would also answer questions like, "Is this IKE request from x.y.z.N authenticated with a certificate that's qualified to speak for x.y.z.N?" Dan _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Tue Oct 09 17:52:07 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfMvu-0003q8-KI; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 17:48:06 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IfHoV-0007m4-85 for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 12:20:07 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfHoU-0007lw-Ur for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 12:20:06 -0400 Received: from kuber.nabble.com ([216.139.236.158]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfHoO-0003zq-QG for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 12:20:06 -0400 Received: from isper.nabble.com ([192.168.236.156]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1IfHoE-0000MU-Fo for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 09:19:50 -0700 Message-ID: <13118971.post@talk.nabble.com> Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 09:19:50 -0700 (PDT) From: whatdapech To: ipsec@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Nabble-From: whatdapech@yahoo.com X-Spam-Score: 1.4 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 93238566e09e6e262849b4f805833007 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 17:48:04 -0400 Subject: [IPsec] IPSec Tunnel limitations X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0148588739==" Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org --===============0148588739== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_10023_15043970.1191946790484" ------=_Part_10023_15043970.1191946790484 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, I'm just wondering if there is a limit as to how many users can use an IPSec tunnel simultaneously; Two offices are connected via T1 on a router to router setup. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/IPSec-Tunnel-limitations-tf4595275.html#a13118971 Sent from the IETF - Ipsec mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ------=_Part_10023_15043970.1191946790484 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, I'm just wondering if there is a limit as to how many users can use an IPSec tunnel simultaneously; Two offices are connected via T1 on a router to router setup.

View this message in context: IPSec Tunnel limitations
Sent from the IETF - Ipsec mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
------=_Part_10023_15043970.1191946790484-- --===============0148588739== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec --===============0148588739==-- From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Tue Oct 09 17:52:07 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfMvt-0003p8-Rb; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 17:48:05 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IfF6w-0003y2-3q for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 09:26:58 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfF6v-0003xt-PP for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 09:26:57 -0400 Received: from kuber.nabble.com ([216.139.236.158]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (EFrom ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Tue Oct 09 17:52:07 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfMvu-0003q8-KI; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 17:48:06 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IfHoV-0007m4-85 for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 12:20:07 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfHoU-0007lw-Ur for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 12:20:06 -0400 Received: from kuber.nabble.com ([216.139.236.158]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfHoO-0003zq-QG for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 12:20:06 -0400 Received: from isper.nabble.com ([192.168.236.156]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1IfHoE-0000MU-Fo for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 09:19:50 -0700 Message-ID: <13118971.post@talk.nabble.com> Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 09:19:50 -0700 (PDT) From: whatdapech To: ipsec@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Nabble-From: whatdapech@yahoo.com X-Spam-Score: 1.4 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 93238566e09e6e262849b4f805833007 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 17:48:04 -0400 Subject: [IPsec] IPSec Tunnel limitations X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0148588739==" Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org --===============0148588739== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_10023_15043970.1191946790484" ------=_Part_10023_15043970.1191946790484 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, I'm just wondering if there is a limit as to how many users can use an IPSec tunnel simultaneously; Two offices are connected via T1 on a router to router setup. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/IPSec-Tunnel-limitations-tf4595275.html#a13118971 Sent from the IETF - Ipsec mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ------=_Part_10023_15043970.1191946790484 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, I'm just wondering if there is a limit as to how many users can use an IPSec tunnel simultaneously; Two offices are connected via T1 on a router to router setup.

View this message in context: IPSec Tunnel limitations
Sent from the IETF - Ipsec mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
------=_Part_10023_15043970.1191946790484-- --===============0148588739== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec --===============0148588739==-- From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Tue Oct 09 17:52:07 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfMvt-0003p8-Rb; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 17:48:05 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IfF6w-0003y2-3q for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 09:26:58 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfF6v-0003xt-PP for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 09:26:57 -0400 Received: from kuber.nabble.com ([216.139.236.158]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfF6v-0002X8-Ex for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 09:26:57 -0400 Received: from isper.nabble.com ([192.168.236.156]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1IfF6v-00030k-1X for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 06:26:57 -0700 Message-ID: <13115564.post@talk.nabble.com> Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 06:26:57 -0700 (PDT) From: Tjeu To: ipsec@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Nabble-From: david_gutenberrger@hotmail.com X-Spam-Score: 1.1 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660f1819ae38035ac1d8d5e3ab X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 17:48:04 -0400 Subject: [IPsec] IPSec, ESP and AH authentication X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Dear All, As you might know, IPSec ESP authentication does not authenticate the destination and source addresses of the IP header, whereas the IPSec AH authentication does(i.e. calculatec MAC over them). However, both claim that they offer data origin authentication. It is not clear for me how the ESP authentication offers data origin authentication, as the MAC is not computed on the source and dest addresses. Therefore the attacker could easily modify them. Am I missing something ? I would be thankful if anyone could provide links where I could read regarding this subject, in more details. I looked through some RFC's but they dont seem to help. Thanks, Tjeu -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/IPSec%2C-ESP-and-AH-authentication-tf4594212.html#a13115564 Sent from the IETF - Ipsec mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec xim 4.43) id 1IfF6v-0002X8-Ex for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 09:26:57 -0400 Received: from isper.nabble.com ([192.168.236.156]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1IfF6v-00030k-1X for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 06:26:57 -0700 Message-ID: <13115564.post@talk.nabble.com> Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 06:26:57 -0700 (PDT) From: Tjeu To: ipsec@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Nabble-From: david_gutenberrger@hotmail.com X-Spam-Score: 1.1 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660f1819ae38035ac1d8d5e3ab X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 09 Oct 2007 17:48:04 -0400 Subject: [IPsec] IPSec, ESP and AH authentication X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Dear All, As you might know, IPSec ESP authentication does not authenticate the destination and source addresses of the IP header, whereas the IPSec AH authentication does(i.e. calculatec MAC over them). However, both claim that they offer data origin authentication. It is not clear for me how the ESP authentication offers data origin authentication, as the MAC is not computed on the source and dest addresses. Therefore the attacker could easily modify them. Am I missing something ? I would be thankful if anyone could provide links where I could read regarding this subject, in more details. I looked through some RFC's but they dont seem to help. Thanks, Tjeu -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/IPSec%2C-ESP-and-AH-authentication-tf4594212.html#a13115564 Sent from the IETF - Ipsec mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Tue Oct 09 18:16:20 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfNLR-0001OX-Oy; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 18:14:29 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IfNLR-0001ON-8X for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 18:14:29 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfNLQ-0001OF-Uc for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 18:14:28 -0400 Received: from sca-ea-mail-3.sun.com ([192.18.43.21]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfNLQ-0001GA-Gm for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 18:14:28 -0400 Received: from dm-east-02.east.sun.com ([129.148.13.5]) by sca-ea-mail-3.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l99MERjS023100 for ; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 22:14:27 GMT Received: from everywhere.east.sun.com (everywhere.East.Sun.COM [129.148.19.2]) by dm-east-02.east.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL, v2.2) with ESMTP id l99MERsr046589 for ; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 18:14:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from everywhere.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by everywhere.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l99M6t8L109074; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 18:06:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from danmcd@localhost) by everywhere.east.sun.com (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l99M6tHP109073; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 18:06:55 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: everywhere.east.sun.com: danmcd set sender to danmcd@sun.com using -f Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 18:06:55 -0400 From: Dan McDonald To: whatdapech Subject: Re: [IPsec] IPSec Tunnel limitations Message-ID: <20071009220655.GB108970@sun.com> References: <13118971.post@talk.nabble.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <13118971.post@talk.nabble.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. - Solaris Networking & Security X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7a6398bf8aaeabc7a7bb696b6b0a2aad Cc: ipsec@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 09:19:50AM -0700, whatdapech wrote: > > Hi, I'm just wondering if there is a limit as to how many users can use an > IPSec tunnel simultaneously; Two offices are connected via T1 on a router to > router setup. As many as your link can hold, or if you have really SLOW boxes doing IPsec, to the capacity of your encryptors. If you're talking T1 speeds, any mid-90s or later machine can keep AES + SHA-1 going quite easily. Dan _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Tue Oct 09 19:49:23 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfOjw-0001Zt-8k; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 19:43:52 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IfOju-0001Zo-Vx for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 19:43:50 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfOju-0001S5-LQ for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 19:43:50 -0400 Received: from machshav.com ([198.180.150.44]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfOjp-0003Y3-C1 for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 19:43:45 -0400 Received: by machshav.com (Postfix, from userid 512) id 0B4995B4; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 23:43:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: from berkshire.machshav.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE18F15D; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 23:43:44 +0000 (GMT) Received: from berkshire.machshav.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by berkshire.machshav.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A136C766013; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 19:43:45 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 23:43:45 +0000 From: "Steven M. Bellovin" To: Tjeu Subject: Re: [IPsec] IPSec, ESP and AH authentication Message-ID: <20071009234345.044f62d9@berkshire.machshav.com> In-Reply-To: <13115564.post@talk.nabble.com> References: <13115564.post@talk.nabble.com> Organization: Columbia University X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.0.1 (GTK+ 2.10.14; i386--netbsdelf) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 93238566e09e6e262849b4f805833007 Cc: ipsec@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 06:26:57 -0700 (PDT) Tjeu wrote: > > Dear All, > > As you might know, IPSec ESP authentication does not authenticate the > destination and source > addresses of the IP header, whereas the IPSec AH authentication > does(i.e. calculatec MAC over them). However, both claim that they > offer data origin authentication. It is not clear for me how the ESP > authentication offers data origin authentication, as the MAC is not > computed on the source and dest addresses. Therefore the attacker > could easily modify them. Am I missing something ? I would be > thankful if anyone could provide links where I could read regarding > this subject, in more details. I looked through some RFC's but they > dont seem to help. > Put the IP addresses in the SPD, and derive that in turn from the authenticated identity. If the attacker modifies them, the packet will be dropped because it won't match the SPD. --Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From Eplettjygo@reotrading.com Tue Oct 09 21:16:57 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfQC0-0001az-W4 for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 21:16:56 -0400 Received: from cm194172.red83-165.mundo-r.com ([83.165.194.172]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfQBz-0003Lq-IR for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 21:16:56 -0400 Received: from pc2 ([113.199.144.172] helo=pc2) by cm194172.red83-165.mundo-r.com ( sendmail 8.13.3/8.13.1) with esmtpa id 1UiQmC-000PGF-GI for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 03:19:29 +0200 Message-ID: <000e01c80adb$85172020$acc2a553@pc2> From: "Pauli Eplett" To: Subject: skadok Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 03:18:52 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0009_01C80AEC.489FF020" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 X-Spam-Score: 4.9 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 52e1467c2184c31006318542db5614d5 ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C80AEC.489FF020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable http://www.rezaq.com/ Yo man ipsec-archive There are many men out there just like you, who want to improve their = penis size Pauli Eplett ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C80AEC.489FF020 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
http://www.rezaq.com/
Yo man ipsec-archive
There are many men out there just like you, = who want to=20 improve their penis size
Pauli Eplett
------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C80AEC.489FF020-- From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Tue Oct 09 22:12:58 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfQzS-0000oy-97; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 22:08:02 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IfQzR-0000oh-Gs for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 22:08:01 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfQzR-0000oZ-6Q for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 22:08:01 -0400 Received: from kuber.nabble.com ([216.139.236.158]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfQzQ-0000bG-Rh for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 22:08:01 -0400 Received: from isper.nabble.com ([192.168.236.156]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1IfQzQ-0000CZ-82 for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Oct 2007 19:08:00 -0700 Message-ID: <13128189.post@talk.nabble.com> Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 19:08:00 -0700 (PDT) From: whatdapech To: ipsec@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ipsec] IPSec Tunnel limitations In-Reply-To: <20071009220655.GB108970@sun.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Nabble-From: whatdapech@yahoo.com References: <13118971.post@talk.nabble.com> <20071009220655.GB108970@sun.com> X-Spam-Score: 1.4 (+) X-Scan-Signature: cab78e1e39c4b328567edb48482b6a69 X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Hi Dan, Thanks for that info... I have 2 Cisco 2811 routers and I'm worried that if i have 96 users accessing the tunnel at the same time could cause the tunnel to drop due to the multiple encryptions going on the tunnel. My Manager wants me to get a solid document saying that there is such limitation so can you point me to a certain link in case you've read this somewhere? I have been researching for it for quite some time now. Not that i don't believe you... (",) thanks. Dan McDonald-2 wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 09:19:50AM -0700, whatdapech wrote: >> >> Hi, I'm just wondering if there is a limit as to how many users can use >> an >> IPSec tunnel simultaneously; Two offices are connected via T1 on a router >> to >> router setup. > > As many as your link can hold, or if you have really SLOW boxes doing > IPsec, > to the capacity of your encryptors. > > If you're talking T1 speeds, any mid-90s or later machine can keep AES + > SHA-1 going quite easily. > > Dan > > > _______________________________________________ > IPsec mailing list > IPsec@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/IPSec-Tunnel-limitations-tf4595275.html#a13128189 Sent from the IETF - Ipsec mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 10 02:32:29 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfUyt-0003iW-K1; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 02:23:43 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IfUys-0003iL-Sk for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 02:23:42 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfUys-0003VF-Fc for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 02:23:42 -0400 Received: from ip-66-80-10-146.dsl.sca.megapath.net ([66.80.10.146] helo=barracuda.intoto.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfUyh-0004Bj-E0 for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 02:23:37 -0400 Received: from angel.intoto.com (smtp.intoto.com [10.1.5.29]) by barracuda.intoto.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 4ED6144357; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 23:22:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brahma.hyd.intoto.com (intotoind.com [172.16.1.10]) by angel.intoto.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l9A6T5lv017996; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 23:29:06 -0700 Received: from nsm.intoto.com (3mc100.hyd.intoto.com [172.16.3.100]) by brahma.hyd.intoto.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l9A6MF8I022831; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 11:52:22 +0530 Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.1.20071010104747.04eb6d90@intoto.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 10:58:31 +0530 To: Dan McDonald , Joy Latten From: ns srinivasa murthy Subject: Re: [IPsec] PAD and IKEv2 In-Reply-To: <20071009200326.GE6141@kebe.East.Sun.COM> References: <1191958117.2477.212.camel@faith.austin.ibm.com> <20071009200326.GE6141@kebe.East.Sun.COM> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 172.16.1.10 X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 932cba6e0228cc603da43d861a7e09d8 Cc: ipsec@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1222613123==" Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org --===============1222613123== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_8021703==.ALT" --=====================_8021703==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed PAD is not mandatory as per the following paragraph from RFC4301 "4.4. Major IPsec Databases Many of the details associated with processing IP traffic in an IPsec implementation are largely a local matter, not subject to standardization. However, some external aspects of the processing must be standardized to ensure interoperability and to provide a minimum management capability that is essential for productive use of IPsec. This section describes a general model for processing IP traffic relative to IPsec functionality, in support of these interoperability and functionality goals. The model described below is nominal; implementations need not match details of this model as presented, but the external behavior of implementations MUST correspond to the externally observable characteristics of this model in order to be compliant. -nsmurthy At 01:33 AM 10/10/2007, Dan McDonald wrote: >On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 02:28:37PM -0500, Joy Latten wrote: > > RFC 4301 specifies a Peer Authentication Database. > >s/Authentication/Authorization/ > > > In section 4.4.3.4, it even talks about how IKE > > is to use the PAD. > > > > I see no reference to PAD in RFC 4306 - IKEv2. > > > > Is PAD mandatory for 4301 and 4306 conformance? > > >From my readings, I get the impression that PAD is an IPsec policy (SPD) --> >Key Management Policy (configuration + basic acceptance tests) mapping. For >example, if you look in ike.config(4) on Solaris or OpenSolaris with the >OpenSolaris binary extras, that's a sort of PAD (though not as well mapped as >4301 says). Our ike.config answers questions like, "Which type of IKE >authentication should I use or accept?" and, "Do I accept any IKE from >addresses in prefix /N?" A more 4301-like PAD would also answer >questions like, "Is this IKE request from x.y.z.N authenticated with a >certificate that's qualified to speak for x.y.z.N?" > >Dan > > >_______________________________________________ >IPsec mailing list >IPsec@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec ******************************************************************************** This email message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential, proprietary and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please immediately notify the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you. Intoto Inc. --=====================_8021703==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
PAD is not mandatory as per the following paragraph from RFC4301

"4.4.  Major IPsec Databases

Many of the details associated with processing IP traffic in an IPsec
   implementation are largely a local matter, not subject to
   standardization.  However, some external aspects of the
processing
   must be standardized to ensure interoperability and to
provide a
   minimum management capability that is essential for
productive use of
   IPsec.  This section describes a general model for
processing IP
   traffic relative to IPsec functionality, in support of
these
   interoperability and functionality goals.  The model
described below
   is nominal; implementations need not match details of this
model as
   presented, but the external behavior of implementations
MUST
   correspond to the externally observable characteristics of
this model
   in order to be compliant.

-nsmurthy

At 01:33 AM 10/10/2007, Dan McDonald wrote:
On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 02:28:37PM -0500, Joy Latten wrote:
> RFC 4301 specifies a Peer Authentication Database.

s/Authentication/Authorization/

> In section 4.4.3.4, it even talks about how IKE
> is to use the PAD.
>
> I see no reference to PAD in RFC 4306 - IKEv2.
>
> Is PAD mandatory for 4301 and 4306 conformance?

>From my readings, I get the impression that PAD is an IPsec policy (SPD) -->
Key Management Policy (configuration + basic acceptance tests) mapping.  For
example, if you look in ike.config(4) on Solaris or OpenSolaris with the
OpenSolaris binary extras, that's a sort of PAD (though not as well mapped as
4301 says).  Our ike.config answers questions like, "Which type of IKE
authentication should I use or accept?" and, "Do I accept any IKE from
addresses in prefix <foo>/N?"  A more 4301-like PAD would also answer
questions like, "Is this IKE request from x.y.z.N authenticated with a
certificate that's qualified to speak for x.y.z.N?"

Dan


_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
IPsec@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec

--=====================_8021703==.ALT-- --===============1222613123== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec --===============1222613123==-- From ritsimanesog@simane.de Wed Oct 10 02:42:57 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfVHV-0000qw-05; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 02:42:57 -0400 Received: from [81.214.74.93] (helo=dsl.static812147493.ttnet.net.tr) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfVHP-0004bv-W8; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 02:42:53 -0400 Received: from [81.214.74.93] by smtp-01.tld.t-online.de; Tue, 9 Oct 2007 25:49:38 +0200 Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 25:49:38 +0200 From: "Karl Peoples" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.51) Home Reply-To: ritsimanesog@simane.de X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <264083736.12619543711135@simane.de> To: 6lowpan@lists.ietf.org Subject: Software MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----------8BDA3EC8BD3ECFFF" X-Spam-Score: 3.6 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 9466e0365fc95844abaf7c3f15a05c7d ------------8BDA3EC8BD3ECFFF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Are you looking for the best prices in software abatements? Right now you'll obtain the chance to have the softwares you wanted for a very long time. And the best matter for you is, all softs are dirt cheap. Check it up by yourself & take the softwares for cheapest rates ever seen. http://qbeqlir.luxuryrealsoft.com/ ------------8BDA3EC8BD3ECFFF Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Are you looking for the best prices in software abatements?
Right now you'll obtain the chance to have the softwares you wanted for a very long time.
And the best matter for you is, all softs are dirt cheap.
Check it up by yourself & take the softwares for cheapest rates ever seen.
http://qbeqlir.luxuryrealsoft.com/ ------------8BDA3EC8BD3ECFFF-- From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 10 02:55:08 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfVQA-0008SN-OE; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 02:51:54 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IfVQ9-0008KE-1M for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 02:51:53 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfVQ4-0008IK-PC for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 02:51:48 -0400 Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([131.228.20.171] helo=mgw-ext12.nokia.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfVPy-0004pt-Di for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 02:51:48 -0400 Received: from esebh106.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh106.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.213]) by mgw-ext12.nokia.com (Switch-3.2.5/Switch-3.2.5) with ESMTP id l9A6pQos027920 for ; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 09:51:30 +0300 Received: from esebh104.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.143.34]) by esebh106.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 10 Oct 2007 09:51:21 +0300 Received: from esebe105.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.143.53]) by esebh104.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 10 Oct 2007 09:51:21 +0300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 09:51:23 +0300 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Last call comments for draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 Thread-Index: AcgKX7Axn+dHrGDJTk6vVKK6mKQRUwAqi9xA From: To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Oct 2007 06:51:21.0755 (UTC) FILETIME=[F7A66EB0:01C80B09] X-Nokia-AV: Clean X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8b30eb7682a596edff707698f4a80f7d Subject: [IPsec] FW: Last call comments for draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org FYI (for folks who're not on the ietf main list) > -----Original Message----- > From: Eronen Pasi (Nokia-NRC/Helsinki)=20 > Sent: 09 October, 2007 13:32 > To: ietf@ietf.org > Cc: 'mlepinski@bbn.com'; Stephen Kent > Subject: Last call comments for draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 >=20 >=20 > Two comments about the IPsec-related parts: >=20 > 1) Section 1 says: >=20 > "Sixteen additional groups subsequently have been defined and > assigned values by IANA for use with IKE (v1 and v2). All of > these additional groups are optional in the IKE context. Of > the twenty-one groups defined so far, eight are MODP groups > (exponentiation groups modulo a prime), ten are EC2N groups > (elliptic curve groups over GF[2^N]) and three are ECP groups > (elliptic curve groups over GF[P]). >=20 > This is not totally correct. As of this writing, no EC2N groups > have been assigned values for use with IKEv2. Also, eight of the > ten EC2N groups for IKEv1 are not documented in any RFC. (And yes, > I'm aware of draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups -- but that hasn't > been approved yet, and requires changes before approval.) >=20 >=20 > 2) For IKEv1/IKEv2, the document should explicitly specify how=20 > ECC points are converted to octet strings (for KE payloads=20 > and resulting shared secret value). Currently, there are at=20 > least three incompatible options (RFC 4753, RFC 2409, and=20 > draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups-10 drafts). I'd suggest just > saying "the same way as in RFC 4753". >=20 >=20 > Best regards, > Pasi _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 10 03:19:39 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfVnR-0001Oh-MT; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 03:15:57 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IfVnR-0001Oc-37 for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 03:15:57 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfVnQ-0001OT-Pi for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 03:15:56 -0400 Received: from datnt07.tieto.com ([194.110.47.24] helo=tietoe03.tietoenator.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfVnK-0005UD-IO for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 03:15:56 -0400 X-AuditID: c26e2f18-00001ec400001bdc-66-470c7bf76953 Received: from camaro.eu.tieto.com ([192.176.143.43]) by tietoe03.tietoenator.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 10 Oct 2007 10:15:03 +0300 Received: from corvette.eu.tieto.com ([192.176.143.143]) by camaro.eu.tieto.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 10 Oct 2007 09:15:23 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: SV: [IPsec] PAD and IKEv2 Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 09:15:23 +0200 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [IPsec] PAD and IKEv2 Thread-Index: AcgLChS0YTzrvQUXS8WQRRl4u/GNWAAAdSjm References: <1191958117.2477.212.camel@faith.austin.ibm.com><20071009200326.GE6141@kebe.East.Sun.COM> <7.0.1.0.1.20071010104747.04eb6d90@intoto.com> From: To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Oct 2007 07:15:23.0478 (UTC) FILETIME=[52FBE760:01C80B0D] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 73734d43604d52d23b3eba644a169745 Cc: ipsec@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org As I understand it, somewhere the local node should store which IKE peers it may talk to. Each IKE session negotiates CHILD SAs. The local node can negotiate only CHILD SAs / traffic selectors found in its SPD. The PAD is a table to relate which=20 traffic selectors can be negotiated by which IKE peers. In case all IKE peers are allowed to negotiate all traffic selectors, there is no need for the PAD. =20 Christian ________________________________ Fra: ns srinivasa murthy [mailto:nsmurthy@intoto.com] Sendt: on 10-10-2007 07:28 Til: Dan McDonald; Joy Latten Cc: ipsec@ietf.org Emne: Re: [IPsec] PAD and IKEv2 PAD is not mandatory as per the following paragraph from RFC4301 "4.4. Major IPsec Databases Many of the details associated with processing IP traffic in an IPsec implementation are largely a local matter, not subject to standardization. However, some external aspects of the processing must be standardized to ensure interoperability and to provide a minimum management capability that is essential for productive use of IPsec. This section describes a general model for processing IP traffic relative to IPsec functionality, in support of these interoperability and functionality goals. The model described below is nominal; implementations need not match details of this model as presented, but the external behavior of implementations MUST correspond to the externally observable characteristics of this model in order to be compliant. -nsmurthy At 01:33 AM 10/10/2007, Dan McDonald wrote: On Tue, Oct 09, 2007 at 02:28:37PM -0500, Joy Latten wrote: > RFC 4301 specifies a Peer Authentication Database. =09 s/Authentication/Authorization/ =09 > In section 4.4.3.4, it even talks about how IKE > is to use the PAD. >=20 > I see no reference to PAD in RFC 4306 - IKEv2. >=20 > Is PAD mandatory for 4301 and 4306 conformance? =09 >From my readings, I get the impression that PAD is an IPsec policy = (SPD) --> Key Management Policy (configuration + basic acceptance tests) mapping. = For example, if you look in ike.config(4) on Solaris or OpenSolaris with = the OpenSolaris binary extras, that's a sort of PAD (though not as well = mapped as 4301 says). Our ike.config answers questions like, "Which type of IKE authentication should I use or accept?" and, "Do I accept any IKE from addresses in prefix /N?" A more 4301-like PAD would also answer questions like, "Is this IKE request from x.y.z.N authenticated with a certificate that's qualified to speak for x.y.z.N?" =09 Dan =09 =09 _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 10 03:45:25 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfWBU-0002l3-2T; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 03:40:48 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IfWBS-0002kj-Mo for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 03:40:46 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfWBS-0002kU-9x for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 03:40:46 -0400 Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([131.228.20.173] helo=mgw-ext14.nokia.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfWBM-00068w-MN for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 03:40:46 -0400 Received: from esebh105.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh105.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.211]) by mgw-ext14.nokia.com (Switch-3.2.5/Switch-3.2.5) with ESMTP id l9A7e7I9023174 for ; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 10:40:33 +0300 Received: from esebh103.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.143.33]) by esebh105.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 10 Oct 2007 10:40:06 +0300 Received: from esebe105.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.143.53]) by esebh103.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 10 Oct 2007 10:40:06 +0300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [IPsec] PAD and IKEv2 Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 10:40:07 +0300 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [IPsec] PAD and IKEv2 Thread-Index: AcgLChS0YTzrvQUXS8WQRRl4u/GNWAAAdSjmAAEVVWA= References: <1191958117.2477.212.camel@faith.austin.ibm.com><20071009200326.GE6141@kebe.East.Sun.COM><7.0.1.0.1.20071010104747.04eb6d90@intoto.com> From: To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Oct 2007 07:40:06.0566 (UTC) FILETIME=[C6F92C60:01C80B10] X-Nokia-AV: Clean X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d0bdc596f8dd1c226c458f0b4df27a88 X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Traffic selector authorization is not the only piece of information stored in PAD. My understanding is that the RFC 4301 PAD is a purely logical (documentation) concept, not an implementation concept. In=20 other words, a real implementation does not necessarily have a=20 data structure called PAD, but it does have some information=20 that enables IKEv2 to work (e.g. how to authenticate peers,=20 what SAs different peers can create, etc.) and RFC 4301 calls=20 this information "PAD". Existing implementations might call it "isakmpd.conf" or something like that... Best regards, Pasi > -----Original Message----- > From: Christian.Kaas-Petersen@tietoenator.com > Sent: 10 October, 2007 10:15 > To: nsmurthy@intoto.com > Cc: ipsec@ietf.org > Subject: SV: [IPsec] PAD and IKEv2 >=20 > As I understand it, somewhere the local node should store which > IKE peers it may talk to. Each IKE session negotiates CHILD SAs. > The local node can negotiate only CHILD SAs / traffic selectors > found in its SPD. The PAD is a table to relate which=20 > traffic selectors can be negotiated by which IKE peers. In > case all IKE peers are allowed to negotiate all traffic selectors, > there is no need for the PAD. > =20 > Christian >=20 > ________________________________ >=20 > Fra: ns srinivasa murthy [mailto:nsmurthy@intoto.com] > Sendt: on 10-10-2007 07:28 > Til: Dan McDonald; Joy Latten > Cc: ipsec@ietf.org > Emne: Re: [IPsec] PAD and IKEv2 >=20 >=20 >=20 > PAD is not mandatory as per the following paragraph from RFC4301 >=20 >=20 > "4.4. Major IPsec Databases >=20 > Many of the details associated with processing IP traffic in an IPsec > implementation are largely a local matter, not subject to > standardization. However, some external aspects of the > processing > must be standardized to ensure interoperability and to > provide a > minimum management capability that is essential for > productive use of > IPsec. This section describes a general model for > processing IP > traffic relative to IPsec functionality, in support of > these > interoperability and functionality goals. The model > described below > is nominal; implementations need not match details of this > model as > presented, but the external behavior of implementations > MUST > correspond to the externally observable characteristics of > this model > in order to be compliant. >=20 > -nsmurthy >=20 _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 10 03:48:25 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfWHi-0003y7-Vp; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 03:47:14 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IfWHh-0003v9-HP for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 03:47:13 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfWHg-0003b3-Ii for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 03:47:13 -0400 Received: from ip-66-80-10-146.dsl.sca.megapath.net ([66.80.10.146] helo=barracuda.intoto.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfWHQ-0006Kj-4j for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 03:47:02 -0400 Received: from angel.intoto.com (smtp.intoto.com [10.1.5.29]) by barracuda.intoto.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 0E010378AD; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 00:46:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from brahma.hyd.intoto.com (intotoind.com [172.16.1.10]) by angel.intoto.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l9A7r1To023613; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 00:53:02 -0700 Received: from nsm.intoto.com (3mc100.hyd.intoto.com [172.16.3.100]) by brahma.hyd.intoto.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l9A7kGre021885; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:16:18 +0530 Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.1.20071010115610.023b1ec0@intoto.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0 Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:17:45 +0530 To: "Steven M. Bellovin" , Tjeu From: ns srinivasa murthy Subject: Re: [IPsec] IPSec, ESP and AH authentication In-Reply-To: <20071009234345.044f62d9@berkshire.machshav.com> References: <13115564.post@talk.nabble.com> <20071009234345.044f62d9@berkshire.machshav.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 172.16.1.10 X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: ff03b0075c3fc728d7d60a15b4ee1ad2 Cc: ipsec@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0590139934==" Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org --===============0590139934== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=====================_13062781==.ALT" --=====================_13062781==.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed In tunnel mode ESP ,the inner IP header is protected and as such no one can change the source IP in between.This inner IP packet is the actual data packet and its source IP can not be changed.So Data origin Authentication is supported in tunnel mode ESP. Even if the outer Source IP is changed in between,the attacker can not do any harm.The implementation has to take care that the out going ESP traffic is sent only to the tunnel end point detected as part of IKE negotiation. -nsmurthy At 05:13 AM 10/10/2007, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: >On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 06:26:57 -0700 (PDT) >Tjeu wrote: > > > > > Dear All, > > > > As you might know, IPSec ESP authentication does not authenticate the > > destination and source > > addresses of the IP header, whereas the IPSec AH authentication > > does(i.e. calculatec MAC over them). However, both claim that they > > offer data origin authentication. It is not clear for me how the ESP > > authentication offers data origin authentication, as the MAC is not > > computed on the source and dest addresses. Therefore the attacker > > could easily modify them. Am I missing something ? I would be > > thankful if anyone could provide links where I could read regarding > > this subject, in more details. I looked through some RFC's but they > > dont seem to help. > > >Put the IP addresses in the SPD, and derive that in turn from the >authenticated identity. If the attacker modifies them, the packet will >be dropped because it won't match the SPD. > > > --Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb > > >_______________________________________________ >IPsec mailing list >IPsec@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec ******************************************************************************** This email message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential, proprietary and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please immediately notify the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. Thank you. Intoto Inc. --=====================_13062781==.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
In tunnel mode ESP ,the inner IP header is protected and as such no one can change the source IP in between.This inner IP packet is the actual data packet and its source IP can not be changed.So Data origin Authentication is supported in tunnel mode ESP.

Even if the outer Source IP is changed in between,the attacker can not do any harm.The implementation has to take care that the out going ESP traffic is sent only to the tunnel end point detected as part of IKE negotiation.

-nsmurthy

At 05:13 AM 10/10/2007, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 06:26:57 -0700 (PDT)
Tjeu <david_gutenberrger@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
> Dear All,

> As you might know, IPSec ESP authentication does not authenticate the
> destination and source
> addresses of the IP header, whereas the IPSec AH authentication
> does(i.e. calculatec MAC over them). However, both claim that they
> offer data origin authentication. It is not clear for me how the ESP
> authentication offers data origin authentication, as the MAC is not
> computed on the source and dest addresses. Therefore the attacker
> could easily modify them. Am I missing something ? I would be
> thankful if anyone could provide links where I could read regarding
> this subject, in more details. I looked through some RFC's but they
> dont seem to help.
>
Put the IP addresses in the SPD, and derive that in turn from the
authenticated identity.  If the attacker modifies them, the packet will
be dropped because it won't match the SPD.


                 --Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb


_______________________________________________
IPsec mailing list
IPsec@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec

--=====================_13062781==.ALT-- --===============0590139934== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec --===============0590139934==-- From gslack@telmex.com Wed Oct 10 07:11:30 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfZTO-0007va-Aq for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 07:11:30 -0400 Received: from [122.167.192.7] (helo=ABTS-KK-Dynamic-007.192.167.122.airtelbroadband.in) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfZTI-0004r1-K2 for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 07:11:26 -0400 Received: from wqof ([53.131.120.186]) by ABTS-KK-Dynamic-007.192.167.122.airtelbroadband.in (8.13.2/8.13.2) with SMTP id l9ABC7oP037406; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 16:42:07 +0530 Message-ID: <470CB348.1030008@telmex.com> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 16:41:04 +0530 From: User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: cool arcade games Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 01485d64dfa90b45a74269b3ca9d5574 No membership, no tricks, no gimmicks, just 1000 free games. http://88.119.121.140/ From BilliewinchRandall@berlios.de Wed Oct 10 09:24:23 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfbXz-0004vq-D4 for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 09:24:23 -0400 Received: from [201.221.170.38] (helo=pc2) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfbXw-00014B-3M for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 09:24:21 -0400 Message-ID: <443801c80b40$d65b4fa0$0d00a8c0@PC2> From: "Sterling Dominguez" To: Subject: Re: You can pay off your loan early Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 08:22:11 +0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_4434_01C80B40.D65B4FA0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.2663 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.2757 X-Spam-Score: 4.5 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 7aafa0432175920a4b3e118e16c5cb64 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_4434_01C80B40.D65B4FA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Let us assist with the placement of working capital business loans for = small to medium sized businesses in all 50 states We've created an affordable, simple, and flexible approach to providing = working capital of $5,000 to $500,000 or more. No obligation application. No cost to apply. No closing costs. Poor = credit not a problem. Get approved in 48 hours! with a simple application process & quick = funding, Call Us Free on 877-347-3607 ------=_NextPart_000_4434_01C80B40.D65B4FA0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Let us assist with the placement of = working=20 capital business loans for small to medium sized businesses in all 50=20 states
 
We've created an affordable, simple, = and flexible=20 approach to providing working capital of $5,000 to $500,000 or=20 more.
=20
 
No obligation application. No cost = to apply. No=20 closing costs. Poor credit not a problem.
 
Get approved in 48 hours! with a = simple=20 application process & quick funding, Call Us Free on=20 877-347-3607
------=_NextPart_000_4434_01C80B40.D65B4FA0-- From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 10 10:27:22 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfcT9-00040S-7I; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 10:23:27 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IfcT7-0003x0-V9 for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 10:23:25 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfcT7-0003ws-L3; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 10:23:25 -0400 Received: from balder-227.proper.com ([192.245.12.227]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfcT2-0003Pl-GQ; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 10:23:25 -0400 Received: from [192.168.1.3] (pool-72-76-39-171.nwrknj.fios.verizon.net [72.76.39.171]) (authenticated bits=0) by balder-227.proper.com (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id l9AEMxj9006313 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 10 Oct 2007 07:23:01 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from paul.hoffman@vpnc.org) Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 10:22:53 -0400 To: , , IPsec WG From: Paul Hoffman Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 52e1467c2184c31006318542db5614d5 Cc: kent@bbn.com, mlepinski@bbn.com Subject: [IPsec] Re: Last call comments for draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org At 1:32 PM +0300 10/9/07, wrote: >1) Section 1 says: > > "Sixteen additional groups subsequently have been defined and > assigned values by IANA for use with IKE (v1 and v2). All of > these additional groups are optional in the IKE context. Of > the twenty-one groups defined so far, eight are MODP groups > (exponentiation groups modulo a prime), ten are EC2N groups > (elliptic curve groups over GF[2^N]) and three are ECP groups > (elliptic curve groups over GF[P]). > >This is not totally correct. As of this writing, no EC2N groups >have been assigned values for use with IKEv2. Also, eight of the >ten EC2N groups for IKEv1 are not documented in any RFC. (And yes, >I'm aware of draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups -- but that hasn't >been approved yet, and requires changes before approval.) draft-lepinski-dh-groups needs to track draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups very carefully. If there is any mis-match, we will have interoperability problems in the future. >2) For IKEv1/IKEv2, the document should explicitly specify how >ECC points are converted to octet strings (for KE payloads >and resulting shared secret value). Currently, there are at >least three incompatible options (RFC 4753, RFC 2409, and >draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups-10 drafts). I'd suggest just >saying "the same way as in RFC 4753". This bodes really poorly for interoperability. draft-lepinski-dh-groups needs to be revised to specify one of the methods, and that needs to be discussed on the IPsec mailing list. I would not assume that implementers would prefer RFC 4753 over draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups. --Paul Hoffman, Director --VPN Consortium _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 10 11:42:07 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfdeP-0007wU-KK; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 11:39:09 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IfdeO-0007u2-KE for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 11:39:08 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfdeO-0007tW-7A for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 11:39:08 -0400 Received: from elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.69]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfdeL-0000AG-Ks for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 11:39:06 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=ix.netcom.com; b=GU/dn8hzguSzIAO2lEEgieRb99Eqib8DYTCIsmQM1Uy2okA8s+joCsXslplaFGQm; h=Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:To:Subject:Cc:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [209.86.224.53] (helo=elwamui-wigeon.atl.sa.earthlink.net) by elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1IfdeL-0001Gn-6H; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 11:39:05 -0400 Received: from 72.18.28.2 by webmail.pas.earthlink.net with HTTP; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 11:39:01 -0400 Message-ID: <5139695.1192030741081.JavaMail.root@elwamui-wigeon.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 08:39:01 -0700 (GMT-07:00) From: "Scott G. Kelly" To: Tjeu Subject: Re: [IPsec] IPSec, ESP and AH authentication Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: EarthLink Zoo Mail 1.0 X-ELNK-Trace: 5b98cdd91c374dcd776432462e451d7bd15d05d9470ff7108bb3d9444fed297a39d1e9faf8608140350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 209.86.224.53 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: c0bedb65cce30976f0bf60a0a39edea4 Cc: ipsec@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: "Scott G. Kelly" List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org As Srinivasa points out, changes to the source IP really are irrelevant. Data origin authentication has nothing to do with IP addresses - it has to do with _endpoints_, which may be applications, people, etc. IP addresses can change, but presumably, only the authorized, authenticated endpoint has the appropriate keys with which to assert the originating identity. -----Original Message----- >From: ns srinivasa murthy >Sent: Oct 10, 2007 12:47 AM >To: "Steven M. Bellovin" , Tjeu >Cc: ipsec@ietf.org >Subject: Re: [IPsec] IPSec, ESP and AH authentication > > >In tunnel mode ESP ,the inner IP header is protected and as such no >one can change the source IP in between.This inner IP packet is the >actual data packet and its source IP can not be changed.So Data >origin Authentication is supported in tunnel mode ESP. > >Even if the outer Source IP is changed in between,the attacker can >not do any harm.The implementation has to take care that the out >going ESP traffic is sent only to the tunnel end point detected as >part of IKE negotiation. > >-nsmurthy > >At 05:13 AM 10/10/2007, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: >>On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 06:26:57 -0700 (PDT) >>Tjeu wrote: >> >> > >> > Dear All, >> > >> > As you might know, IPSec ESP authentication does not authenticate the >> > destination and source >> > addresses of the IP header, whereas the IPSec AH authentication >> > does(i.e. calculatec MAC over them). However, both claim that they >> > offer data origin authentication. It is not clear for me how the ESP >> > authentication offers data origin authentication, as the MAC is not >> > computed on the source and dest addresses. Therefore the attacker >> > could easily modify them. Am I missing something ? I would be >> > thankful if anyone could provide links where I could read regarding >> > this subject, in more details. I looked through some RFC's but they >> > dont seem to help. >> > >>Put the IP addresses in the SPD, and derive that in turn from the >>authenticated identity. If the attacker modifies them, the packet will >>be dropped because it won't match the SPD. >> >> >> --Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>IPsec mailing list >>IPsec@ietf.org >>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec > > >******************************************************************************** >This email message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) >and may contain confidential, proprietary and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, >use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, >please immediately notify the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. >Thank you. > >Intoto Inc. > _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 10 12:21:42 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfeGi-0005Sq-53; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 12:18:44 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IfeGg-0005ST-Sp for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 12:18:42 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfeGg-0005S8-Iz for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 12:18:42 -0400 Received: from mx11.bbn.com ([128.33.0.80]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfeGa-0007O8-8F for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 12:18:42 -0400 Received: from dhcp89-089-116.bbn.com ([128.89.89.116]) by mx11.bbn.com with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IfeGK-0001MM-4n; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 12:18:20 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <1191958117.2477.212.camel@faith.austin.ibm.com><20071009200326.GE6141@keb e.East.Sun.COM> <7.0.1.0.1.20071010104747.04eb6d90@intoto.com> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 12:13:12 -0400 To: From: Karen Seo Subject: Re: SV: [IPsec] PAD and IKEv2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660f1819ae38035ac1d8d5e3ab Cc: ipsec@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org I think we're in agreement, but just to be sure ... the PAD defines which peers are authorized to communicate with the IPsec entity in question, how to authenticate each peer, and which entities each peer is authorized to represent (for child SA creation). If all peers were allowed to communicate with the IPsec entity and any peer could represent any entity (ID), then yes, I suppose one would not need a PAD for these functions. 4.5.3 mentions that the PAD could be the place where one stores information about locating security gateways, in which case, one would need a PAD. Karen >As I understand it, somewhere the local node should store which >IKE peers it may talk to. Each IKE session negotiates CHILD SAs. >The local node can negotiate only CHILD SAs / traffic selectors >found in its SPD. The PAD is a table to relate which >traffic selectors can be negotiated by which IKE peers. In >case all IKE peers are allowed to negotiate all traffic selectors, >there is no need for the PAD. > >Christian > _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 10 13:02:22 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IferV-0007wD-7M; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 12:56:45 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IferT-0007vw-Lx for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 12:56:43 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IferT-0007dh-Aw for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 12:56:43 -0400 Received: from owa.tma.osd.mil ([199.208.0.139] helo=densisa01.tma.osd.mil) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ifer8-0002ZY-TL for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 12:56:23 -0400 Received: from densowa01.tma.osd.mil ([159.133.170.55]) by densisa01.tma.osd.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 10 Oct 2007 10:56:18 -0600 Received: from hasmailsrs01.ha.osd.mil ([164.65.217.77]) by densowa01.tma.osd.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 10 Oct 2007 10:56:18 -0600 Received: from hasmail01.ha.osd.mil ([164.65.217.79]) by hasmailsrs01.ha.osd.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 10 Oct 2007 12:56:17 -0400 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Subject: RE: [IPsec] IPSec, ESP and AH authentication Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 12:56:17 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <5139695.1192030741081.JavaMail.root@elwamui-wigeon.atl.sa.earthlink.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [IPsec] IPSec, ESP and AH authentication Thread-Index: AcgLVTFL23+P0ExZSBeY5WmK48H03wABsljg References: <5139695.1192030741081.JavaMail.root@elwamui-wigeon.atl.sa.earthlink.net> From: "Dunn, Jeffrey, CTR, OASD(HA)/TMA" To: "Scott G. Kelly" , "Tjeu" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Oct 2007 16:56:17.0339 (UTC) FILETIME=[798108B0:01C80B5E] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 9a2be21919e71dc6faef12b370c4ecf5 Cc: ipsec@ietf.org, "Dunn, Jeffrey, CTR, OASD\(HA\)/TMA" X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Scott, While data origin is IP (v4 or v6) address agnostic from the point of view of user data, e.g., e-mail, it can be important to routing protocols. This is especially true for IPv6, where the OSPFv3 router ID is no longer an IP (v4) address, it is just a 32 bit unsigned integer. As a result, ESP-Null authenticated packets can be re-played with a different source IPv6 address. This will cause some obvious and nasty problems. Putting IPv6 addresses in the SPD will, of course, mitigate this problem, but with a 16 octet IPv6 address, this is cumbersome and error prone. As a result, it is more expedient to use AH. Best Regards, Jeffrey Dunn -----Original Message----- From: Scott G. Kelly [mailto:s.kelly@ix.netcom.com]=20 Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 11:39 AM To: Tjeu Cc: ipsec@ietf.org Subject: Re: [IPsec] IPSec, ESP and AH authentication As Srinivasa points out, changes to the source IP really are irrelevant. Data origin authentication has nothing to do with IP addresses - it has to do with _endpoints_, which may be applications, people, etc.=20 IP addresses can change, but presumably, only the authorized, authenticated endpoint has the appropriate keys with which to assert the originating identity. -----Original Message----- >From: ns srinivasa murthy >Sent: Oct 10, 2007 12:47 AM >To: "Steven M. Bellovin" , Tjeu=20 > >Cc: ipsec@ietf.org >Subject: Re: [IPsec] IPSec, ESP and AH authentication > > >In tunnel mode ESP ,the inner IP header is protected and as such no one >can change the source IP in between.This inner IP packet is the actual=20 >data packet and its source IP can not be changed.So Data origin=20 >Authentication is supported in tunnel mode ESP. > >Even if the outer Source IP is changed in between,the attacker can not=20 >do any harm.The implementation has to take care that the out going ESP=20 >traffic is sent only to the tunnel end point detected as part of IKE=20 >negotiation. > >-nsmurthy > >At 05:13 AM 10/10/2007, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: >>On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 06:26:57 -0700 (PDT) Tjeu=20 >> wrote: >> >> > >> > Dear All, >> > >> > As you might know, IPSec ESP authentication does not authenticate=20 >> > the destination and source addresses of the IP header, whereas the=20 >> > IPSec AH authentication does(i.e. calculatec MAC over them).=20 >> > However, both claim that they offer data origin authentication. It=20 >> > is not clear for me how the ESP authentication offers data origin=20 >> > authentication, as the MAC is not computed on the source and dest=20 >> > addresses. Therefore the attacker could easily modify them. Am I=20 >> > missing something ? I would be thankful if anyone could provide=20 >> > links where I could read regarding this subject, in more details. I >> > looked through some RFC's but they dont seem to help. >> > >>Put the IP addresses in the SPD, and derive that in turn from the=20 >>authenticated identity. If the attacker modifies them, the packet=20 >>will be dropped because it won't match the SPD. >> >> >> --Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>IPsec mailing list >>IPsec@ietf.org >>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec > > >*********************************************************************** >********* This email message (including any attachments) is for the=20 >sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential,=20 >proprietary and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,=20 >disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended=20 >recipient, please immediately notify the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. >Thank you. >=20 >Intoto Inc.=20 > _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 10 13:25:59 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IffH5-0000Ir-RI; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:23:11 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IffH3-0000Il-Sv for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:23:09 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IffH3-0000Cz-Iq for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:23:09 -0400 Received: from elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.62]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IffGs-0001E5-CZ for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:23:04 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=ix.netcom.com; b=abRP8NQQykXl3/QanoE6GB4n6z0UHYdLe3+/DKr2cX4/U9IJJQk62Ovau/x/ObUb; h=Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:To:Subject:Cc:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [209.86.224.53] (helo=elwamui-wigeon.atl.sa.earthlink.net) by elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1IffGa-00053X-UY; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:22:41 -0400 Received: from 72.18.28.2 by webmail.pas.earthlink.net with HTTP; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:22:40 -0400 Message-ID: <32137417.1192036960667.JavaMail.root@elwamui-wigeon.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 10:22:40 -0700 (GMT-07:00) From: "Scott G. Kelly" To: "Dunn,Jeffrey,CTR,OASD(HA)/TMA" , Tjeu Subject: RE: [IPsec] IPSec, ESP and AH authentication Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: EarthLink Zoo Mail 1.0 X-ELNK-Trace: 5b98cdd91c374dcd776432462e451d7bd15d05d9470ff71055d47e367748b4d54feec902c1475b0b350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 209.86.224.53 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 5d7a7e767f20255fce80fa0b77fb2433 Cc: ipsec@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: "Scott G. Kelly" List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org I guess my IPv6 ignorance is showing (again), and I'd better get busy and remedy that. Are you saying that despite the anti-replay capability of IPsec, the payloads of the packets you describe below can be replayed, and this will have destructive consequences for the intervening infrastructure? My guess is that this is complex, and that lots of people here won't want to be bored simply due to my ignorance. If you know of docs I could read (especially brief ones :-)) to better understand the issues here, maybe you can send me pointers offline. Thanks for the clarification. -----Original Message----- >From: "Dunn, Jeffrey, CTR, OASD(HA)/TMA" >Sent: Oct 10, 2007 9:56 AM >To: "Scott G. Kelly" , Tjeu >Cc: ipsec@ietf.org, "Dunn, Jeffrey, CTR, OASD(HA)/TMA" >Subject: RE: [IPsec] IPSec, ESP and AH authentication > >Scott, > >While data origin is IP (v4 or v6) address agnostic from the point of >view of user data, e.g., e-mail, it can be important to routing >protocols. This is especially true for IPv6, where the OSPFv3 router ID >is no longer an IP (v4) address, it is just a 32 bit unsigned integer. >As a result, ESP-Null authenticated packets can be re-played with a >different source IPv6 address. This will cause some obvious and nasty >problems. Putting IPv6 addresses in the SPD will, of course, mitigate >this problem, but with a 16 octet IPv6 address, this is cumbersome and >error prone. As a result, it is more expedient to use AH. > > >Best Regards, > >Jeffrey Dunn > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Scott G. Kelly [mailto:s.kelly@ix.netcom.com] >Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 11:39 AM >To: Tjeu >Cc: ipsec@ietf.org >Subject: Re: [IPsec] IPSec, ESP and AH authentication > >As Srinivasa points out, changes to the source IP really are irrelevant. >Data origin authentication has nothing to do with IP addresses - it has >to do with _endpoints_, which may be applications, people, etc. > >IP addresses can change, but presumably, only the authorized, >authenticated endpoint has the appropriate keys with which to assert the >originating identity. > >-----Original Message----- >>From: ns srinivasa murthy >>Sent: Oct 10, 2007 12:47 AM >>To: "Steven M. Bellovin" , Tjeu >> >>Cc: ipsec@ietf.org >>Subject: Re: [IPsec] IPSec, ESP and AH authentication >> >> >>In tunnel mode ESP ,the inner IP header is protected and as such no one > >>can change the source IP in between.This inner IP packet is the actual >>data packet and its source IP can not be changed.So Data origin >>Authentication is supported in tunnel mode ESP. >> >>Even if the outer Source IP is changed in between,the attacker can not >>do any harm.The implementation has to take care that the out going ESP >>traffic is sent only to the tunnel end point detected as part of IKE >>negotiation. >> >>-nsmurthy >> >>At 05:13 AM 10/10/2007, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: >>>On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 06:26:57 -0700 (PDT) Tjeu >>> wrote: >>> >>> > >>> > Dear All, >>> > >>> > As you might know, IPSec ESP authentication does not authenticate >>> > the destination and source addresses of the IP header, whereas the >>> > IPSec AH authentication does(i.e. calculatec MAC over them). >>> > However, both claim that they offer data origin authentication. It >>> > is not clear for me how the ESP authentication offers data origin >>> > authentication, as the MAC is not computed on the source and dest >>> > addresses. Therefore the attacker could easily modify them. Am I >>> > missing something ? I would be thankful if anyone could provide >>> > links where I could read regarding this subject, in more details. I > >>> > looked through some RFC's but they dont seem to help. >>> > >>>Put the IP addresses in the SPD, and derive that in turn from the >>>authenticated identity. If the attacker modifies them, the packet >>>will be dropped because it won't match the SPD. >>> >>> >>> --Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb >>> >>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>IPsec mailing list >>>IPsec@ietf.org >>>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec >> >> >>*********************************************************************** >>********* This email message (including any attachments) is for the >>sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential, >>proprietary and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, >>disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended >>recipient, please immediately notify the sender by reply email and >destroy all copies of the original message. >>Thank you. >> >>Intoto Inc. >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >IPsec mailing list >IPsec@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 10 13:50:16 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfffV-0001Xt-Tx; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:48:25 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IfffV-0001Xj-FI for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:48:25 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfffU-0001X1-Ug for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:48:24 -0400 Received: from chip8og56.obsmtp.com ([64.18.15.185]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfffS-0002I6-0z for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:48:24 -0400 Received: from source ([12.110.134.31]) by chip8ob56.postini.com ([64.18.7.12]) with SMTP; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 10:46:28 PDT Received: from pkoning-laptop.equallogic.com.equallogic.com ([172.25.202.114]) by M31.equallogic.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:45:45 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <18189.4039.333042.713953@pkoning-laptop.equallogic.com> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:45:43 -0400 From: Paul Koning To: scott@hyperthought.com Subject: RE: [IPsec] IPSec, ESP and AH authentication References: <32137417.1192036960667.JavaMail.root@elwamui-wigeon.atl.sa.earthlink.net> X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.4 (patch 19) "Constant Variable" XEmacs Lucid X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Oct 2007 17:45:45.0510 (UTC) FILETIME=[62ABFC60:01C80B65] X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) X-Scan-Signature: 93238566e09e6e262849b4f805833007 Cc: ipsec@ietf.org, Jeffrey.Dunn.ctr@tma.osd.mil, david_gutenberrger@hotmail.com X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org >>>>> "Scott" == Scott G Kelly writes: Scott> I guess my IPv6 ignorance is showing (again), and I'd better Scott> get busy and remedy that. Are you saying that despite the Scott> anti-replay capability of IPsec, the payloads of the packets Scott> you describe below can be replayed, and this will have Scott> destructive consequences for the intervening infrastructure? Scott> My guess is that this is complex, and that lots of people here Scott> won't want to be bored simply due to my ignorance. If you know Scott> of docs I could read (especially brief ones :-)) to better Scott> understand the issues here, maybe you can send me pointers Scott> offline. Please don't move this offline. I'm puzzled too by this assertion that antireplay doesn't work. Or was the comment addressed to the privacy-only mode of ESP (no authentication)? IPsec is an end to end protocol; how is it possible for the behavior of the routers to have any bearing on what services you get from IPsec? paul _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 10 13:53:35 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iffjm-0007Kk-3V; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:52:50 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Iffjk-00079D-Hu for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:52:48 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iffjj-00078s-Un for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:52:48 -0400 Received: from owa.tma.osd.mil ([199.208.0.139] helo=densisa01.tma.osd.mil) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iffji-0004rE-T4 for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:52:47 -0400 Received: from densowa01.tma.osd.mil ([159.133.170.55]) by densisa01.tma.osd.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 10 Oct 2007 11:52:46 -0600 Received: from hasmailsrs01.ha.osd.mil ([164.65.217.77]) by densowa01.tma.osd.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 10 Oct 2007 11:52:45 -0600 Received: from hasmail01.ha.osd.mil ([164.65.217.79]) by hasmailsrs01.ha.osd.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:52:44 -0400 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Subject: RE: [IPsec] IPSec, ESP and AH authentication Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:52:43 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <32137417.1192036960667.JavaMail.root@elwamui-wigeon.atl.sa.earthlink.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [IPsec] IPSec, ESP and AH authentication Thread-Index: AcgLYjW9uduHOCWYQsC26bgPPUsf6gAAlEGg References: <32137417.1192036960667.JavaMail.root@elwamui-wigeon.atl.sa.earthlink.net> From: "Dunn, Jeffrey, CTR, OASD(HA)/TMA" To: "Scott G. Kelly" , "Tjeu" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Oct 2007 17:52:44.0624 (UTC) FILETIME=[5C7BB500:01C80B66] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 9af087f15dbdd4c64ae6bbcdbc5b1d44 Cc: ipsec@ietf.org, "Dunn, Jeffrey, CTR, OASD\(HA\)/TMA" , "Ford, Ryan, CTR, OASD\(HA\)/TMA" , "Edsall, Curt, CTR, OASD\(HA\)/TMA" X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Scott, Not a problem. My argument is based on some fairly simple logic and the following. RFC 4552 states: "The SPD selection function MUST return an SPD with the following rules for all the interfaces that have OSPFv3 authentication/confidentiality enabled. No. source destination protocol action 2 fe80::/10 any OSPF protect 3 fe80::/10 any ESP/OSPF or AH/OSPF protect" This is specifically to support multicast links (AllSPFRouters or AllDRouters). Since anti-replay (sequence number processing) is not supported for multicast, there is no anti-replay for some OSPFv3 using multicast links. Specifically, RFC 4303 states: "ESP provides no means of synchronizing packet counters among multiple senders or meaningfully managing a receiver packet counter and window in the context of multiple senders. Thus, for a multi-sender SA, the anti-replay features of ESP are not available." As a result, IMHO, any OSPFv3 router using multicast links probably should be using AH rather than ESP-Null. Best Regards, Jeffrey Dunn -----Original Message----- From: Scott G. Kelly [mailto:s.kelly@ix.netcom.com]=20 Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 1:23 PM To: Dunn, Jeffrey, CTR, OASD(HA)/TMA; Tjeu Cc: ipsec@ietf.org Subject: RE: [IPsec] IPSec, ESP and AH authentication I guess my IPv6 ignorance is showing (again), and I'd better get busy and remedy that. Are you saying that despite the anti-replay capability of IPsec, the payloads of the packets you describe below can be replayed, and this will have destructive consequences for the intervening infrastructure? My guess is that this is complex, and that lots of people here won't want to be bored simply due to my ignorance. If you know of docs I could read (especially brief ones :-)) to better understand the issues here, maybe you can send me pointers offline. Thanks for the clarification. -----Original Message----- >From: "Dunn, Jeffrey, CTR, OASD(HA)/TMA" >Sent: Oct 10, 2007 9:56 AM >To: "Scott G. Kelly" , Tjeu=20 > >Cc: ipsec@ietf.org, "Dunn, Jeffrey, CTR, OASD(HA)/TMA"=20 > >Subject: RE: [IPsec] IPSec, ESP and AH authentication > >Scott, > >While data origin is IP (v4 or v6) address agnostic from the point of=20 >view of user data, e.g., e-mail, it can be important to routing=20 >protocols. This is especially true for IPv6, where the OSPFv3 router=20 >ID is no longer an IP (v4) address, it is just a 32 bit unsigned integer. >As a result, ESP-Null authenticated packets can be re-played with a=20 >different source IPv6 address. This will cause some obvious and nasty=20 >problems. Putting IPv6 addresses in the SPD will, of course, mitigate=20 >this problem, but with a 16 octet IPv6 address, this is cumbersome and=20 >error prone. As a result, it is more expedient to use AH. > > >Best Regards, > >Jeffrey Dunn > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Scott G. Kelly [mailto:s.kelly@ix.netcom.com] >Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 11:39 AM >To: Tjeu >Cc: ipsec@ietf.org >Subject: Re: [IPsec] IPSec, ESP and AH authentication > >As Srinivasa points out, changes to the source IP really are irrelevant. >Data origin authentication has nothing to do with IP addresses - it has >to do with _endpoints_, which may be applications, people, etc. > >IP addresses can change, but presumably, only the authorized,=20 >authenticated endpoint has the appropriate keys with which to assert=20 >the originating identity. > >-----Original Message----- >>From: ns srinivasa murthy >>Sent: Oct 10, 2007 12:47 AM >>To: "Steven M. Bellovin" , Tjeu=20 >> >>Cc: ipsec@ietf.org >>Subject: Re: [IPsec] IPSec, ESP and AH authentication >> >> >>In tunnel mode ESP ,the inner IP header is protected and as such no=20 >>one > >>can change the source IP in between.This inner IP packet is the actual >>data packet and its source IP can not be changed.So Data origin=20 >>Authentication is supported in tunnel mode ESP. >> >>Even if the outer Source IP is changed in between,the attacker can not >>do any harm.The implementation has to take care that the out going ESP >>traffic is sent only to the tunnel end point detected as part of IKE=20 >>negotiation. >> >>-nsmurthy >> >>At 05:13 AM 10/10/2007, Steven M. Bellovin wrote: >>>On Tue, 9 Oct 2007 06:26:57 -0700 (PDT) Tjeu=20 >>> wrote: >>> >>> > >>> > Dear All, >>> > >>> > As you might know, IPSec ESP authentication does not authenticate=20 >>> > the destination and source addresses of the IP header, whereas the >>> > IPSec AH authentication does(i.e. calculatec MAC over them). >>> > However, both claim that they offer data origin authentication. It >>> > is not clear for me how the ESP authentication offers data origin=20 >>> > authentication, as the MAC is not computed on the source and dest=20 >>> > addresses. Therefore the attacker could easily modify them. Am I=20 >>> > missing something ? I would be thankful if anyone could provide=20 >>> > links where I could read regarding this subject, in more details.=20 >>> > I > >>> > looked through some RFC's but they dont seem to help. >>> > >>>Put the IP addresses in the SPD, and derive that in turn from the=20 >>>authenticated identity. If the attacker modifies them, the packet=20 >>>will be dropped because it won't match the SPD. >>> >>> >>> --Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb >>> >>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>IPsec mailing list >>>IPsec@ietf.org >>>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec >> >> >>********************************************************************** >>* >>********* This email message (including any attachments) is for the=20 >>sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential,=20 >>proprietary and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,=20 >>disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended=20 >>recipient, please immediately notify the sender by reply email and >destroy all copies of the original message. >>Thank you. >>=20 >>Intoto Inc.=20 >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >IPsec mailing list >IPsec@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 10 14:40:41 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfgQy-0003Q0-3A; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:37:28 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IfgQw-0003Pv-Le for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:37:26 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfgQw-0003Ex-AV for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:37:26 -0400 Received: from e3.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.143]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfgQj-00043l-Fe for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:37:21 -0400 Received: from d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (d01relay04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.236]) by e3.ny.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l9AIb69b023681 for ; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:37:06 -0400 Received: from d01av01.pok.ibm.com (d01av01.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.215]) by d01relay04.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.5) with ESMTP id l9AIb6Ta547020 for ; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:37:06 -0400 Received: from d01av01.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av01.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l9AIatcn029924 for ; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:36:55 -0400 Received: from austin.ibm.com (netmail1.austin.ibm.com [9.41.248.175]) by d01av01.pok.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l9AIatt1029420; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:36:55 -0400 Received: from faith.austin.ibm.com (faith.austin.ibm.com [9.53.40.35]) by austin.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.12.10) with ESMTP id l9AIaihP043850; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:36:45 -0500 Received: from faith.austin.ibm.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by faith.austin.ibm.com (8.13.4/8.12.8) with ESMTP id l9AIWaEq017286; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:32:36 -0500 Received: (from jml@localhost) by faith.austin.ibm.com (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id l9AIWVY2017284; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:32:31 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: faith.austin.ibm.com: jml set sender to latten@austin.ibm.com using -f Subject: Re: SV: [IPsec] PAD and IKEv2 From: Joy Latten To: Karen Seo In-Reply-To: References: <1191958117.2477.212.camel@faith.austin.ibm.com> <20071009200326.GE6141@keb e.East.Sun.COM> <7.0.1.0.1.20071010104747.04eb6d90@intoto.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 13:32:31 -0500 Message-Id: <1192041151.2477.329.camel@faith.austin.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) X-Scan-Signature: 856eb5f76e7a34990d1d457d8e8e5b7f Cc: Christian.Kaas-Petersen@tietoenator.com, ipsec@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org On Wed, 2007-10-10 at 12:13 -0400, Karen Seo wrote: > I think we're in agreement, but just to be sure ... the PAD defines > which peers are authorized to communicate with the IPsec entity in > question, how to authenticate each peer, and which entities each peer > is authorized to represent (for child SA creation). If all peers were > allowed to communicate with the IPsec entity and any peer could > represent any entity (ID), then yes, I suppose one would not need a > PAD for these functions. 4.5.3 mentions that the PAD could be the > place where one stores information about locating security gateways, > in which case, one would need a PAD. > Yes, that makes sense to me. I was under the impression that the PAD was an actual database or data structure such as the SPD. Thanks for the clarification. Regards, Joy _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 10 15:36:28 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfhH4-0003zk-JP; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 15:31:18 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IfhH3-0003nw-Jh for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 15:31:17 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfhH0-00035B-SZ for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 15:31:15 -0400 Received: from datnt07.tieto.com ([194.110.47.24] helo=tietoe03.tietoenator.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfhGv-0007yL-Bq for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 15:31:09 -0400 X-AuditID: c26e2f18-00001f14000003cc-b2-470d28662139 Received: from camaro.eu.tieto.com ([192.176.143.43]) by tietoe03.tietoenator.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 10 Oct 2007 22:30:46 +0300 Received: from corvette.eu.tieto.com ([192.176.143.143]) by camaro.eu.tieto.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 10 Oct 2007 21:31:07 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: SV: [IPsec] PAD and IKEv2 Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 21:31:07 +0200 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [IPsec] PAD and IKEv2 Thread-Index: AcgLbJCThoBcriYqRFOyqojXZRjy1QABhY1e References: <1191958117.2477.212.camel@faith.austin.ibm.com><20071009200326.GE6141@keb e.East.Sun.COM><7.0.1.0.1.20071010104747.04eb6d90@intoto.com> <1192041151.2477.329.camel@faith.austin.ibm.com> From: To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Oct 2007 19:31:07.0146 (UTC) FILETIME=[1AA916A0:01C80B74] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 69a74e02bbee44ab4f8eafdbcedd94a1 X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org The PAD gives a mapping/relation/binding between certain pieces of information. It's a local matter how this mapping/relation/binding is realized. I'm aware of at least one implementation, where the PAD is implemented as a table/database. =20 Christian ________________________________ Fra: Joy Latten [mailto:latten@austin.ibm.com] Sendt: on 10-10-2007 20:32 Til: Karen Seo Cc: Kaas-Petersen Christian; ipsec@ietf.org Emne: Re: SV: [IPsec] PAD and IKEv2 On Wed, 2007-10-10 at 12:13 -0400, Karen Seo wrote: > I think we're in agreement, but just to be sure ... the PAD defines > which peers are authorized to communicate with the IPsec entity in > question, how to authenticate each peer, and which entities each peer > is authorized to represent (for child SA creation). If all peers were > allowed to communicate with the IPsec entity and any peer could > represent any entity (ID), then yes, I suppose one would not need a > PAD for these functions. 4.5.3 mentions that the PAD could be the > place where one stores information about locating security gateways, > in which case, one would need a PAD. > Yes, that makes sense to me. I was under the impression that the PAD was an actual database or data structure such as the SPD. Thanks for the clarification. Regards, Joy _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From krhdegree@tamsinc.com Wed Oct 10 17:55:25 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfjWX-0000dh-F2; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 17:55:25 -0400 Received: from [190.42.84.207] (helo=tamsinc.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfjWP-0003sD-Gw; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 17:55:20 -0400 Received: from adminlhyloj9lh ([194.76.85.84]:6777 "HELO adminlhyloj9lh" smtp-auth: TLS-CIPHER: TLS-PEER-CN1: ) by cf542abetamsinc.com with ESMTP id 200C19403E91 (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Oct 2007 16:55:20 +0200 Message-ID: <001b01c80b5e$575886f0$01803624@adminlhyloj9lh> From: superb To: imapext-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: To my empty Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 16:55:20 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0018_01C80B5E.575886F0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1081 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.2962 X-Spam-Score: 3.9 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 9ed51c9d1356100bce94f1ae4ec616a9 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C80B5E.575886F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable feeling you get about the person whose space you are in. The drawing,sculpture will become a thing of the past and more or to create sha= red realities. A virtual reality system will ------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C80B5E.575886F0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

get over the computer intimidation, which has caused some anxiety

Are you wanting a bigger p_ e >n _is?

As se _e -n on T _V

Over 709,000 Men around the world are already satisfied
Gain 2+ Inches In Leng _th
Increase Your P _en -is Wi _dth (Girth) By up _to 21%
100% Safe To Take, With NO Side Effects
No Pum _ps! No Su _rgery! No Exercises!
*3 F _RE >E Bottles

View, Then And Now Pics

trying to set up my own business, I am more aware of the true
------=_NextPart_000_0018_01C80B5E.575886F0-- From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Thu Oct 11 01:15:12 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfqHV-0003lb-VV; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 01:08:21 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IfqHU-0003im-MM for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 01:08:20 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfqHU-0003iZ-AL for ipsec@ietf.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 01:08:20 -0400 Received: from mail1.exchange.microsoft.com ([131.107.1.17] helo=mail.exchange.microsoft.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfqHO-0007la-1G for ipsec@ietf.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 01:08:20 -0400 Received: from df-bhd-02.exchange.corp.microsoft.com (157.54.71.155) by DF-GWY-05.exchange.corp.microsoft.com (157.54.63.146) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.1.206.1; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 22:08:03 -0700 Received: from DF-GRTDANE-MSG.exchange.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.62.10]) by df-bhd-02.exchange.corp.microsoft.com ([157.54.71.155]) with mapi; Wed, 10 Oct 2007 22:08:03 -0700 From: Charlie Kaufman To: Paul Koning , "scott@hyperthought.com" Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 22:08:03 -0700 Subject: RE: [IPsec] IPSec, ESP and AH authentication Thread-Topic: [IPsec] IPSec, ESP and AH authentication Thread-Index: AcgLZxGaqnwOeeJySIawpujszBGRrAAXCMZw Message-ID: <30C65F3A3407B943826897E025135BE6F74B11DE14@DF-GRTDANE-MSG.exchange.corp.microsoft.com> References: <32137417.1192036960667.JavaMail.root@elwamui-wigeon.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <18189.4039.333042.713953@pkoning-laptop.equallogic.com> In-Reply-To: <18189.4039.333042.713953@pkoning-laptop.equallogic.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Score: -100.0 (---------------------------------------------------) X-Scan-Signature: ea4ac80f790299f943f0a53be7e1a21a Cc: "ipsec@ietf.org" , "Jeffrey.Dunn.ctr@tma.osd.mil" , "david_gutenberrger@hotmail.com" X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Paul Koning [mailto:pkoning@equallogic.com] writes: >IPsec is an end to end protocol; how is it possible for the >behavior of the routers to have any bearing on what services >you get from IPsec? It doesn't relate to routers. It relates to multicast, and the example of m= ulticast someone brought up involved communications between routers. Using IPsec to secure multicast has never actually been specified, though v= arious specs include hints about how things might work. Key distribution fo= r multicast is an active research topic. If one were actually to use IPsec to secure multicast, the most plausible w= ay to do it would be to have a different SPI for each sender. If multiple s= enders share an SPI, you end up with the problem the original poster brough= t up (that a man in the middle could change the source address from one leg= itimate sender to another and when using ESP in transport mode this would n= ot be detectable). You also end up with the problem that you can't detect r= eplayed packets because there would be no way for the various senders to ke= ep their sequence numbers in sync (hence two legitimate senders could send = different packets with the same sequence number and recipients would have t= o process both of them). It will be interesting to see if anyone ever actually uses IPsec for multic= ast, and if so how they will address the hard problems. (I could imagine a = spec that says manually distribute keys and ignore sequence numbers, but de= ploying such a system securely seems hard to imagine). --Charlie _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From bumugivisfor@vitamindesign.co.uk Thu Oct 11 01:20:09 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfqSv-0002Gx-O9 for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 01:20:09 -0400 Received: from [78.163.140.36] (helo=oyas) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfqSt-000851-Id for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 01:20:09 -0400 Received: from [194.64.213.183] (helo=tnzdp) by oyas with smtp (Exim 4.62 (FreeBSD)) id 1JqV-0003Uk-J9; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 08:22:15 +0300 Message-ID: <001d01c80bc6$5a8f73c0$b7d540c2@tnzdp> From: To: Subject: re: Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 08:19:53 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="koi8-r"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2578 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2578 X-Spam-Score: 0.7 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 01485d64dfa90b45a74269b3ca9d5574 Now ordering Viagra became even faster than using it due to Canadian Health&Care Mall. http:// From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Thu Oct 11 03:44:22 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfsdY-0008NU-66; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 03:39:16 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IfsdV-0008Kg-N6 for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 03:39:13 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfsdV-0008Es-8I; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 03:39:13 -0400 Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([131.228.20.173] helo=mgw-ext14.nokia.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfsdO-0003jH-D0; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 03:39:12 -0400 Received: from esebh106.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh106.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.213]) by mgw-ext14.nokia.com (Switch-3.2.5/Switch-3.2.5) with ESMTP id l9B7cmOk019559; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 10:38:50 +0300 Received: from esebh104.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.143.34]) by esebh106.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 11 Oct 2007 10:38:34 +0300 Received: from esebe105.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.143.53]) by esebh104.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 11 Oct 2007 10:38:33 +0300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [IPsec] Re: Last call comments for draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 10:38:30 +0300 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [IPsec] Re: Last call comments for draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 Thread-Index: AcgLSzn1NYo0dNhlRXiUN7rjtHQcbAAjlqEg References: From: To: , , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Oct 2007 07:38:33.0271 (UTC) FILETIME=[B9C73C70:01C80BD9] X-Nokia-AV: Clean X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: ffa9dfbbe7cc58b3fa6b8ae3e57b0aa3 Cc: kent@bbn.com, mlepinski@bbn.com X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Paul Hoffman wrote: > >2) For IKEv1/IKEv2, the document should explicitly specify how > >ECC points are converted to octet strings (for KE payloads > >and resulting shared secret value). Currently, there are at > >least three incompatible options (RFC 4753, RFC 2409, and > >draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups-10 drafts). I'd suggest just > >saying "the same way as in RFC 4753". >=20 > This bodes really poorly for interoperability.=20 > draft-lepinski-dh-groups needs to be revised to specify one of the=20 > methods, and that needs to be discussed on the IPsec mailing list.=20 > I would not assume that implementers would prefer RFC 4753 over=20 > draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups. I suggested "the same way as in RFC 4753" not because I particularly prefer that point-to-octet-string conversion method, but because I would prefer not having three different methods (two is bad enough). (Note that the current ecc-groups-10 draft actually tries to=20 modify the definitions of groups 19/20/21 from RFC 4753: it reuses the same numbers but with different point-to-octet-string conversion method.) Best regards, Pasi _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ho-chi3source@centrum.cz Thu Oct 11 04:46:46 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iftgq-0002re-JW for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 04:46:45 -0400 Received: from dyn-83-157-229-189.ppp.tiscali.fr ([83.157.229.189]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iftge-0006pB-KN for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 04:46:39 -0400 Received: from [83.157.229.189] by lygj.centrum.cz; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 08:46:24 +0000 Message-ID: <000a01c80be3$0617d483$a0b9e98a@rfggethq> From: "Kelley Gleason" To: "Jerrold Farley" Subject: Get approved in 48 hours Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 06:59:01 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0007_01C80BE3.0614E30D" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.2663 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.2757 X-Spam-Score: 3.9 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 7aafa0432175920a4b3e118e16c5cb64 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C80BE3.0614E30D Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Let us assist with the placement of working capital business loans for = small to medium sized businesses in all 50 states   We've created an affordable, simple, and flexible approach to providing = working capital of $5,000 to $500,000 or more.   No obligation application. No cost to apply. No closing costs. Poor = credit not a problem.   Get approved in 48 hours! with a simple application process & quick = funding, Call Us Free on=20 877-292-6896 ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C80BE3.0614E30D Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Let us assist with the placement of = working capital business loans for small to medium sized businesses in = all 50 states
 
We've created an affordable, simple, = and flexible approach to providing working capital of $5,000 to $500,000 = or more.
=20
 
No obligation application. No cost = to apply. No closing costs. Poor credit not a problem.
 
Get approved in 48 hours! with a simple = application process & quick funding, Call Us Free on = 877-292-6896
------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C80BE3.0614E30D-- From f4woozo@riva128.com Thu Oct 11 07:48:07 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfwWN-0001xw-7O; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 07:48:07 -0400 Received: from 71-17-123-17.wybn.hsdb.sasknet.sk.ca ([71.17.123.17] helo=riva128.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IfwVv-0006ue-Li; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 07:47:40 -0400 From: "f4woozo@riva128.com" To: , , Subject: This Watch is first class Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 04:10:44 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit boundary="--HTRSDJ30608" X-Spam-Score: 2.8 (++) X-Scan-Signature: d17f825e43c9aed4fd65b7edddddec89 I just got my wife a Bvlgari watch and she really loves it. I can't afford to spend $30 000 on a watch for her, though I would love to; but this did the trick. It looks exactly like the real thing and she's actually glad I didn't spend $30 000 on a watch but saved $29 750 instead. This turned out perfect guys, thanks for providing such a great product, with such great prices. This was a great experience ordering from your company. - Derick Site is http://www.pjtpg.com These e-mails aren't of interest http://www.pjtpg.com/remove From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Thu Oct 11 22:35:10 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgAHV-0002Zz-Gt; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 22:29:41 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IgAHT-0002ZJ-Ue for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 22:29:39 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgAHT-0002ZA-JM for ipsec@ietf.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 22:29:39 -0400 Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com ([61.144.161.7]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgAHS-000826-U4 for ipsec@ietf.org; Thu, 11 Oct 2007 22:29:39 -0400 Received: from huawei.com (szxga04-in [172.24.2.12]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0JPS00MG31K5FV@szxga04-in.huawei.com> for ipsec@ietf.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 10:28:53 +0800 (CST) Received: from huawei.com ([172.24.1.18]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0JPS00J581K51P@szxga04-in.huawei.com> for ipsec@ietf.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 10:28:53 +0800 (CST) Received: from s102542 ([10.111.12.181]) by szxml03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPA id <0JPS00A331K1FX@szxml03-in.huawei.com> for ipsec@ietf.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 10:28:53 +0800 (CST) Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 10:28:30 +0800 From: Sean Shuo Shen Subject: =?gb2312?B?tPC4tDogW0lQc2VjXSBQQUQgYW5kIElLRXYy?= In-reply-to: To: ipsec@ietf.org Message-id: <000901c80c77$94995f20$b50c6f0a@china.huawei.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 Content-type: text/plain; charset=gb2312 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Thread-index: AcgLbJCThoBcriYqRFOyqojXZRjy1QABhY1eAEEQo1A= X-Spam-Score: 1.3 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 0a7aa2e6e558383d84476dc338324fab X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Thanks a lot, Chris and all, These talks are also very helpful to me. Chris, can you point me to the implementation with real PAD files so that I can take a lot? Sean=20 -----=D3=CA=BC=FE=D4=AD=BC=FE----- =B7=A2=BC=FE=C8=CB: Christian.Kaas-Petersen@tietoenator.com [mailto:Christian.Kaas-Petersen@tietoenator.com]=20 =B7=A2=CB=CD=CA=B1=BC=E4: 2007=C4=EA10=D4=C211=C8=D5 3:31 =CA=D5=BC=FE=C8=CB: ipsec@ietf.org =D6=F7=CC=E2: SV: [IPsec] PAD and IKEv2 The PAD gives a mapping/relation/binding between certain pieces of information. It's a local matter how this mapping/relation/binding is realized. I'm aware of at least one implementation, where the PAD is implemented as a table/database. =20 Christian ________________________________ Fra: Joy Latten [mailto:latten@austin.ibm.com] Sendt: on 10-10-2007 20:32 Til: Karen Seo Cc: Kaas-Petersen Christian; ipsec@ietf.org Emne: Re: SV: [IPsec] PAD and IKEv2 On Wed, 2007-10-10 at 12:13 -0400, Karen Seo wrote: > I think we're in agreement, but just to be sure ... the PAD defines > which peers are authorized to communicate with the IPsec entity in > question, how to authenticate each peer, and which entities each peer > is authorized to represent (for child SA creation). If all peers were > allowed to communicate with the IPsec entity and any peer could > represent any entity (ID), then yes, I suppose one would not need a > PAD for these functions. 4.5.3 mentions that the PAD could be the > place where one stores information about locating security gateways, > in which case, one would need a PAD. > Yes, that makes sense to me. I was under the impression that the PAD was an actual database or data structure such as the SPD. Thanks for the clarification. Regards, Joy _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Fri Oct 12 02:56:36 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgEJt-0002k0-30; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 02:48:25 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IgEJs-0002jA-0U for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 02:48:24 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgEJn-0002ia-Ml for ipsec@ietf.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 02:48:19 -0400 Received: from ws000774.tietoenator.com ([193.12.181.129]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgEJi-0006wu-6X for ipsec@ietf.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 02:48:19 -0400 X-AuditID: c10cb581-00000568000012b0-cf-470f18985167 Received: from stingray.eu.tieto.com ([192.176.143.13]) by ws000774.tietoenator.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 12 Oct 2007 08:47:52 +0200 Received: from corvette.eu.tieto.com ([192.176.143.143]) by stingray.eu.tieto.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 12 Oct 2007 08:47:57 +0200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: [IPsec] PAD and IKEv2 Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 08:47:56 +0200 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <000901c80c77$94995f20$b50c6f0a@china.huawei.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [IPsec] PAD and IKEv2 Thread-Index: AcgLbJCThoBcriYqRFOyqojXZRjy1QABhY1eAEEQo1AACQkFsA== References: <000901c80c77$94995f20$b50c6f0a@china.huawei.com> From: To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Oct 2007 06:47:57.0730 (UTC) FILETIME=[D2DE3020:01C80C9B] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) X-Scan-Signature: 21c69d3cfc2dd19218717dbe1d974352 Cc: ipsec@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1375798772==" Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org --===============1375798772== Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 QXMgY29uc3VsdGFudCBJIHNlZSB0aGluZ3MgZm9yIHdoaWNoIEkgY2Fubm90IGRpc2Nsb3NlIHRo ZSBkZXRhaWxzLA0Kb25seSBkaXNjbG9zZSBzb21lIGhpZ2gtbGV2ZWwgYWJzdHJhY3Rpb25zLg0K DQpDaHJpc3RpYW4gDQoNCj4gLS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCj4gRnJvbTogU2Vh biBTaHVvIFNoZW4gW21haWx0bzpzc2hlbkBodWF3ZWkuY29tXSANCj4gU2VudDogMTIuIG9rdG9i ZXIgMjAwNyAwNDoyOQ0KPiBUbzogaXBzZWNAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4gU3ViamVjdDog562U5aSNOiBb SVBzZWNdIFBBRCBhbmQgSUtFdjINCj4gDQo+IFRoYW5rcyBhIGxvdCwgQ2hyaXMgYW5kIGFsbCwN Cj4gVGhlc2UgdGFsa3MgYXJlIGFsc28gdmVyeSBoZWxwZnVsIHRvIG1lLiBDaHJpcywgY2FuIHlv dSBwb2ludCANCj4gbWUgdG8gdGhlDQo+IGltcGxlbWVudGF0aW9uIHdpdGggcmVhbCBQQUQgZmls ZXMgc28gdGhhdCBJIGNhbiB0YWtlIGEgbG90Pw0KPiANCj4gU2VhbiANCj4gDQo+IC0tLS0t6YKu 5Lu25Y6f5Lu2LS0tLS0NCj4g5Y+R5Lu25Lq6OiBDaHJpc3RpYW4uS2Fhcy1QZXRlcnNlbkB0aWV0 b2VuYXRvci5jb20NCj4gW21haWx0bzpDaHJpc3RpYW4uS2Fhcy1QZXRlcnNlbkB0aWV0b2VuYXRv ci5jb21dIA0KPiDlj5HpgIHml7bpl7Q6IDIwMDflubQxMOaciDEx5pelIDM6MzENCj4g5pS25Lu2 5Lq6OiBpcHNlY0BpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiDkuLvpopg6IFNWOiBbSVBzZWNdIFBBRCBhbmQgSUtFdjIN Cj4gDQo+IFRoZSBQQUQgZ2l2ZXMgYSBtYXBwaW5nL3JlbGF0aW9uL2JpbmRpbmcgYmV0d2Vlbg0K PiBjZXJ0YWluIHBpZWNlcyBvZiBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbi4gIEl0J3MgYSBsb2NhbCBtYXR0ZXINCj4g aG93IHRoaXMgbWFwcGluZy9yZWxhdGlvbi9iaW5kaW5nIGlzIHJlYWxpemVkLiAgSSdtDQo+IGF3 YXJlIG9mIGF0IGxlYXN0IG9uZSBpbXBsZW1lbnRhdGlvbiwgd2hlcmUgdGhlIFBBRA0KPiBpcyBp bXBsZW1lbnRlZCBhcyBhIHRhYmxlL2RhdGFiYXNlLg0KPiAgDQo+IENocmlzdGlhbg0KPiANCj4g X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj4gDQo+IEZyYTogSm95IExhdHRlbiBb bWFpbHRvOmxhdHRlbkBhdXN0aW4uaWJtLmNvbV0NCj4gU2VuZHQ6IG9uIDEwLTEwLTIwMDcgMjA6 MzINCj4gVGlsOiBLYXJlbiBTZW8NCj4gQ2M6IEthYXMtUGV0ZXJzZW4gQ2hyaXN0aWFuOyBpcHNl Y0BpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiBFbW5lOiBSZTogU1Y6IFtJUHNlY10gUEFEIGFuZCBJS0V2Mg0KPiANCj4g DQo+IA0KPiBPbiBXZWQsIDIwMDctMTAtMTAgYXQgMTI6MTMgLTA0MDAsIEthcmVuIFNlbyB3cm90 ZToNCj4gPiBJIHRoaW5rIHdlJ3JlIGluIGFncmVlbWVudCwgYnV0IGp1c3QgdG8gYmUgc3VyZSAu Li4gdGhlIFBBRCBkZWZpbmVzDQo+ID4gd2hpY2ggcGVlcnMgYXJlIGF1dGhvcml6ZWQgdG8gY29t bXVuaWNhdGUgd2l0aCB0aGUgSVBzZWMgZW50aXR5IGluDQo+ID4gcXVlc3Rpb24sIGhvdyB0byBh dXRoZW50aWNhdGUgZWFjaCBwZWVyLCBhbmQgd2hpY2ggZW50aXRpZXMgDQo+IGVhY2ggcGVlcg0K PiA+IGlzIGF1dGhvcml6ZWQgdG8gcmVwcmVzZW50IChmb3IgY2hpbGQgU0EgY3JlYXRpb24pLiBJ ZiBhbGwgDQo+IHBlZXJzIHdlcmUNCj4gPiBhbGxvd2VkIHRvIGNvbW11bmljYXRlIHdpdGggdGhl IElQc2VjIGVudGl0eSBhbmQgYW55IHBlZXIgY291bGQNCj4gPiByZXByZXNlbnQgYW55IGVudGl0 eSAoSUQpLCB0aGVuIHllcywgSSBzdXBwb3NlIG9uZSB3b3VsZCBub3QgbmVlZCBhDQo+ID4gUEFE IGZvciB0aGVzZSBmdW5jdGlvbnMuICA0LjUuMyBtZW50aW9ucyB0aGF0IHRoZSBQQUQgY291bGQg YmUgdGhlDQo+ID4gcGxhY2Ugd2hlcmUgb25lIHN0b3JlcyBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBhYm91dCBsb2Nh dGluZyBzZWN1cml0eSBnYXRld2F5cywNCj4gPiBpbiB3aGljaCBjYXNlLCBvbmUgd291bGQgbmVl ZCBhIFBBRC4NCj4gPg0KPiANCj4gWWVzLCB0aGF0IG1ha2VzIHNlbnNlIHRvIG1lLiBJIHdhcyB1 bmRlciB0aGUgaW1wcmVzc2lvbiB0aGF0IHRoZQ0KPiBQQUQgd2FzIGFuIGFjdHVhbCBkYXRhYmFz ZSBvciBkYXRhIHN0cnVjdHVyZSBzdWNoIGFzIHRoZSBTUEQuDQo+IFRoYW5rcyBmb3IgdGhlIGNs YXJpZmljYXRpb24uDQo+IA0KPiBSZWdhcmRzLA0KPiBKb3kNCj4gDQo+IA0KPiANCj4gDQo+IF9f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQo+IElQc2VjIG1h aWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KPiBJUHNlY0BpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiBodHRwczovL3d3dzEuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFp bG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby9pcHNlYw0KPiANCj4gDQo+IA0KPiANCj4gX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj4gSVBzZWMgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+IElQ c2VjQGlldGYub3JnDQo+IGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3MS5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2lw c2VjDQo+IA0K --===============1375798772== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec --===============1375798772==-- From gerald.kraft@ei.edu.uy Fri Oct 12 08:18:10 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgJT0-0006Mj-PE for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 08:18:10 -0400 Received: from [142.47.0.16] (helo=iwmoyu) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgJSv-0001i6-8E for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 08:18:06 -0400 Received: (qmail 15001 invoked from network); Fri, 12 Oct 2007 07:59:25 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO ctwce) (235.36.143.76) by iwmoyu with SMTP; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 07:59:25 -0400 Message-ID: <470F619D.8000202@ei.edu.uy> Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 07:59:25 -0400 From: User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: I've never laughed so hard! Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 3.3 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 0f1ff0b0158b41ac6b9548d0972cdd31 Come get the original Psycho cat Card. http://76.182.251.53/ From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Fri Oct 12 10:29:20 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgLQa-0007gW-5t; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 10:23:48 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IgLQZ-0007gF-Bn for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 10:23:47 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgLQZ-0007Zy-1R for ipsec@ietf.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 10:23:47 -0400 Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.152]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgLQP-0006xs-P7 for ipsec@ietf.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 10:23:44 -0400 Received: from d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.227]) by e34.co.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l9CENSB6025374 for ; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 10:23:28 -0400 Received: from d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (d03av01.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.167]) by d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.5) with ESMTP id l9CENS9J495556 for ; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 08:23:28 -0600 Received: from d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l9CENRPf016465 for ; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 08:23:27 -0600 Received: from austin.ibm.com (netmail2.austin.ibm.com [9.41.248.176]) by d03av01.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l9CENRpM016454; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 08:23:27 -0600 Received: from faith.austin.ibm.com (faith.austin.ibm.com [9.53.40.35]) by austin.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.12.10) with ESMTP id l9CENRSh036486; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 09:23:27 -0500 Received: from faith.austin.ibm.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by faith.austin.ibm.com (8.13.4/8.12.8) with ESMTP id l9CEJFWb001007; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 09:19:16 -0500 Received: (from jml@localhost) by faith.austin.ibm.com (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id l9CEJBFK001005; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 09:19:11 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: faith.austin.ibm.com: jml set sender to latten@austin.ibm.com using -f Subject: Re: SV: [IPsec] PAD and IKEv2 From: Joy Latten To: Christian.Kaas-Petersen@tietoenator.com In-Reply-To: References: <1191958117.2477.212.camel@faith.austin.ibm.com> <20071009200326.GE6141@keb e.East.Sun.COM> <7.0.1.0.1.20071010104747.04eb6d90@intoto.com> <1192041151.2477.329.camel@faith.austin.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 09:19:11 -0500 Message-Id: <1192198751.2477.332.camel@faith.austin.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) X-Scan-Signature: 1ac7cc0a4cd376402b85bc1961a86ac2 Cc: ipsec@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org On Wed, 2007-10-10 at 21:31 +0200, Christian.Kaas-Petersen@tietoenator.com wrote: > The PAD gives a mapping/relation/binding between > certain pieces of information. It's a local matter > how this mapping/relation/binding is realized. I'm > aware of at least one implementation, where the PAD > is implemented as a table/database. > I am curious to know if this was implemented in userspace or kernel? Joy _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Fri Oct 12 11:54:23 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgMo4-0002op-05; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 11:52:08 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IgMo3-0002oh-7G for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 11:52:07 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgMo2-0002oZ-TC for ipsec@ietf.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 11:52:06 -0400 Received: from sca-ea-mail-4.sun.com ([192.18.43.22]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgMo1-0005tK-PD for ipsec@ietf.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 11:52:06 -0400 Received: from centralmail4brm.Central.Sun.COM ([129.147.62.198]) by sca-ea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id l9CFq5FR028100 for ; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 15:52:05 GMT Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM (binky.Central.Sun.COM [129.153.128.104]) by centralmail4brm.Central.Sun.COM (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL, v2.2) with ESMTP id l9CFq4NC021582 for ; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 09:52:04 -0600 (MDT) Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l9CFq4dO028043; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 10:52:04 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from nw141292@localhost) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id l9CFq4je028042; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 10:52:04 -0500 (CDT) X-Authentication-Warning: binky.Central.Sun.COM: nw141292 set sender to Nicolas.Williams@sun.com using -f Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 10:52:04 -0500 From: Nicolas Williams To: Joy Latten Subject: Re: SV: [IPsec] PAD and IKEv2 Message-ID: <20071012155203.GX24532@Sun.COM> Mail-Followup-To: Joy Latten , Christian.Kaas-Petersen@tietoenator.com, ipsec@ietf.org References: <1191958117.2477.212.camel@faith.austin.ibm.com> <7.0.1.0.1.20071010104747.04eb6d90@intoto.com> <1192041151.2477.329.camel@faith.austin.ibm.com> <1192198751.2477.332.camel@faith.austin.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1192198751.2477.332.camel@faith.austin.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.7i X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 08170828343bcf1325e4a0fb4584481c Cc: Christian.Kaas-Petersen@tietoenator.com, ipsec@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org On Fri, Oct 12, 2007 at 09:19:11AM -0500, Joy Latten wrote: > On Wed, 2007-10-10 at 21:31 +0200, > Christian.Kaas-Petersen@tietoenator.com wrote: > > The PAD gives a mapping/relation/binding between > > certain pieces of information. It's a local matter > > how this mapping/relation/binding is realized. I'm > > aware of at least one implementation, where the PAD > > is implemented as a table/database. > > > I am curious to know if this was implemented in userspace > or kernel? That depends on where you implement IKE. Typically IKE is implemented in user-space, so that's where the PAD (or local equivalent) would be used. _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From EverettFarmand@randyketzner.com Fri Oct 12 14:19:15 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgP6R-00041M-JR for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 14:19:15 -0400 Received: from [201.134.137.163] (helo=customer-201-134-137-163.uninet.net.mx) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgP6M-0007gA-KP for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 14:19:13 -0400 Received: from X_LaVeRa ([187.126.79.6] helo=X_LaVeRa) by customer-201-134-137-163.uninet.net.mx ( sendmail 8.13.3/8.13.1) with esmtpa id 1hWJGl-000VMZ-WX for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 13:19:28 -0500 Message-ID: <000501c80cfc$60d4a660$a38986c9@XLaVeRa> From: "Everett Farmand" To: Subject: vohus Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 13:19:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0003_01C80CD2.77FE9E60" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 X-Spam-Score: 3.5 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 52e1467c2184c31006318542db5614d5 ------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C80CD2.77FE9E60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable hey honey ipsec-archive you know you can score a chick with your looks but can you fully satisfy = her in the sack? Everett Farmand http://anajli.com/ ------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C80CD2.77FE9E60 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
hey honey ipsec-archive
you know you can score a chick with your looks = but can=20 you fully satisfy her in the sack?
Everett Farmand
http://anajli.com/
------=_NextPart_000_0003_01C80CD2.77FE9E60-- From gowsputnikdir@sputnik.pl Fri Oct 12 14:35:24 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgPM3-0002Yl-K8; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 14:35:23 -0400 Received: from xdsl-3597.zgora.dialog.net.pl ([84.40.162.13] helo=WIZWORLD) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgPLy-00087v-Q2; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 14:35:20 -0400 Received: from [84.40.162.13] by ASPMX4.GOOGLEMAIL.COM; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 19:35:24 +0100 Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 19:35:24 +0100 From: "Heriberto Goldman" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.60.07) Home Reply-To: gowsputnikdir@sputnik.pl X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <685391720.47247020864792@sputnik.pl> To: 6lowpan@lists.ietf.org Subject: Legal software sales MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----------3C2C098F4DA14DA" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 4d87d2aa806f79fed918a62e834505ca ------------3C2C098F4DA14DA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Our main goal is to provide PC and Macintosh lawful software and computer solutions of low price for anyone's budget. Whether you are a corporate client, an owner of small-scale enterprise, or go shopping for your own home personal computer, we believe that we'll help you. CHECK WHAT WE HAVE TO OFFER http://psapakq.goldsoftstore.com/ Most popular products in sight: *Virtual PC 7.0 for Mac: Retail price for today - $249.99; Our for this time only - $49.95 *Microsoft Windows 2003 Enterprise Server: Retail price today - $800.00; Our for this day just - $69.95 *Adobe Acrobat 8.0 Professional: Retail price this day - $449.00; Our just - $79.95 *Corel Procreate KPT Effects: Retail price this time - $199.00; Our only this time - $19.95 *Macromedia FreeHand MX for PC: Retail price this time - $399.00; Our only this time - $39.95 *Symantec Norton Save & Restore 2.0: Retail price this day - $49.99; Our just - $19.95 *Corel KPT 6: Retail price this day - $199.00; Our just - $39.95 *StuffIt Deluxe 10 for Mac: Retail price for now - $79.99; Our only - $19.95 COME IN JUST NOW! http://psapakq.goldsoftstore.com/ ------------3C2C098F4DA14DA Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Our main goal is to provide PC and Macintosh lawful software and computer solutions of low price for anyone's budget.
Whether you are a corporate client, an owner of small-scale enterprise,
or go shopping for your own home personal computer, we believe that we'll help you.
CHECK WHAT WE HAVE TO OFFER

http://psapakq.goldsoftstore.com/
Most popular products in sight:
*Virtual PC 7.0 for Mac: Retail price for today - $249.99; Our for this time only - $49.95
*Microsoft Windows 2003 Enterprise Server: Retail price today - $800.00; Our for this day just - $69.95
*Adobe Acrobat 8.0 Professional: Retail price this day - $449.00; Our just - $79.95
*Corel Procreate KPT Effects: Retail price this time - $199.00; Our only this time - $19.95
*Macromedia FreeHand MX for PC: Retail price this time - $399.00; Our only this time - $39.95
*Symantec Norton Save & Restore 2.0: Retail price this day - $49.99; Our just - $19.95
*Corel KPT 6: Retail price this day - $199.00; Our just - $39.95
*StuffIt Deluxe 10 for Mac: Retail price for now - $79.99; Our only - $19.95
COME IN JUST NOW!
http://psapakq.goldsoftstore.com/ ------------3C2C098F4DA14DA-- From llidues@rmfyb.com Sat Oct 13 07:05:18 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Igeo2-00016U-2t; Sat, 13 Oct 2007 07:05:18 -0400 Received: from bbt186.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl ([83.27.209.186] helo=rmfyb.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Igenx-00050R-1C; Sat, 13 Oct 2007 07:05:13 -0400 Received: (qmail 661 invoked from network); Sat, 13 Oct 2007 13:07:07 +0200 Received: from unknown (HELO e0eecbcf867d46c) (llidues@rmfyb.com@63.221.246.108) by bad11b53rmfyb.com with SMTP; Sat, 13 Oct 2007 13:07:07 +0200 Message-ID: <000f01c80d99$f516ab00$06a39ed4@e0eecbcf867d46c> From: style To: iporpr-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: ubench Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 13:07:07 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000C_01C80D99.F516AB00" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.0000 X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 9ed51c9d1356100bce94f1ae4ec616a9 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C80D99.F516AB00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1251" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable rudimentary integration of a global society. For instance, sterility of the= MOO keeps you from feeling this. It is pretty other instruments, the political system may change drastically, ------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C80D99.F516AB00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1251" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hostage: We as a group do most importantly want to beseech

Are you wanting a bigger p_ e >n _is?

As se _e -n on T _V

Over 791,000 Men around the world are already satisfied
Gain 3+ Inches In Leng _th
Increase Your P _en -is Wi _dth (Girth) By up _to 24%
100% Safe To Take, With NO Side Effects
No Pum _ps! No Su _rgery! No Exercises!
*3 F _RE >E Bottles

the term 'virtual reality' isn't used sparingly, and that 'the
------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C80D99.F516AB00-- From ipcolumnist@mulchmfg.com Sat Oct 13 07:08:58 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgerZ-0003Zq-UU; Sat, 13 Oct 2007 07:08:57 -0400 Received: from 24-171-25-105.dhcp.stls.mo.charter.com ([24.171.25.105] helo=etheria.mo.charter.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgerW-000597-Hf; Sat, 13 Oct 2007 07:08:54 -0400 Received: (qmail 3576 invoked from network); Sat, 13 Oct 2007 06:08:56 -0500 Received: from unknown (HELO etheria) (ipcolumnist@mulchmfg.com@145.19.242.228) by 6919ab18mulchmfg.com with SMTP; Sat, 13 Oct 2007 06:08:56 -0500 Message-ID: <001601c80d5f$89af9960$0663bb3c@etheria> From: Joshua Michaud To: iporpr-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: no marina Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 06:08:56 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0013_01C80D5F.89AF9960" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.0000 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2462.4682 X-Spam-Score: 3.7 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 9ed51c9d1356100bce94f1ae4ec616a9 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C80D5F.89AF9960 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable direct, or face-to-face contact, and a loss of the more human between circl= ing airplanes. Pointing to a plane with a laser through around the term "interactive," in order to confuse people ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C80D5F.89AF9960 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

ever existed before. It is a field too easy to romanticize. It is

Are you wanting a bigger p_ e >n _is?

As se _e -n on T _V

Over 711,000 Men around the world are already satisfied
Gain 3+ Inches In Leng _th
Increase Your P _en -is Wi _dth (Girth) By up _to 28%
100% Safe To Take, With NO Side Effects
No Pum _ps! No Su _rgery! No Exercises!
*3 F _RE >E Bottles

View, Then And Now Pics<= /DIV>

be seen in the Art world is astronomical and has irrevocally
------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C80D5F.89AF9960-- From Kristin270@alberti.it Sat Oct 13 07:45:35 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgfR1-0001HL-T0 for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 13 Oct 2007 07:45:35 -0400 Received: from host212-84-dynamic.61-82-r.retail.telecomitalia.it ([82.61.84.212] helo=host236-108-dynamic.57-82-r.retail.telecomitalia.it) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgfQx-0006DD-46 for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 13 Oct 2007 07:45:31 -0400 Received: by 10.106.88.94 with SMTP id IuWijecAXhYBn; Sat, 13 Oct 2007 13:45:33 +0200 (GMT) Received: by 192.168.179.233 with SMTP id ZwLoHNXcMpnYBs.9963750322730; Sat, 13 Oct 2007 13:45:31 +0200 (GMT) Message-ID: <000401c80d8e$8d1a7e60$ec6c3952@deethmanfred> From: "Kristin Naugle" To: Subject: jauntie Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 13:45:28 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0007_01C80D9F.50A34E60" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 000780-2, 11/10/2007), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Score: 2.1 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 52e1467c2184c31006318542db5614d5 ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C80D9F.50A34E60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable whatz craken ipsec-archive think your a mack daddy? think again, you aint hittin it with that = twinky you call a dick. Kristin Naugle http://aothon.com/ ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C80D9F.50A34E60 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
whatz craken ipsec-archive
think your a mack daddy? think again, you aint = hittin it=20 with that twinky you call a dick.
Kristin Naugle
http://aothon.com/
------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C80D9F.50A34E60-- From zarstainlesssteelsib@stainlesssteel.it Sat Oct 13 14:01:07 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IglIR-0005fS-4m; Sat, 13 Oct 2007 14:01:07 -0400 Received: from [88.238.183.0] (helo=dsl88.238-46848.ttnet.net.tr) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IglIL-00057M-Sw; Sat, 13 Oct 2007 14:01:04 -0400 Received: from [88.238.183.0] by mail.stainlesssteel.it; Sat, 13 Oct 2007 19:59:42 +0200 Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 19:59:42 +0200 From: "Roman Kern" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.51.10) Professional Reply-To: zarstainlesssteelsib@stainlesssteel.it X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <627350422.97288841838837@stainlesssteel.it> To: 6lowpan@lists.ietf.org Subject: Achieve picture perfect weight and enjoy life MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----------E5BD371096ECFF" X-Spam-Score: 1.6 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 6d95a152022472c7d6cdf886a0424dc6 ------------E5BD371096ECFF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Anatrim - The up-to-the-moment and most delighting lose flesh product is now available - As you could see on BBC. Can you count up all the times when you said to yourself you would do anything to get rid of this fastly growing pounds of fat? Happily, now no big price is to be paid. With Anatrim, the ground-shaking kilos-melting combination of elements, you can get naturally health life style and become really slimmer. Just look at what people say! "It's quite difficult to admit it but I was a junk food addict. I greedily swallowed up all this garbige and was unable to stop. This fatal passion finished after I started taking Anatrim! Oh, God, my appetite decreased, mood improved and I'm the happiest person in the world 28 pounds in 2.2 months. So, I can tell you now I became the happiest person!" Amelia B., Las Vegas "Since the very childhood I was a bulky boy. You can't even fancy how I hated being mocked at school. I detested my weight and I hated even myself. After trying many different remedies I heard about Anatrim. It literally dragged me out of this terrible nightmare! The warmest thanks to you, guys." Mikkey Fox, San Francisco "Do you know what? Thanks to Anatrim my marriage was saved! I went into this circle, depression - more eating - more depression. My wife was about to leave me as I was turning in overweight psycho. Once one of my friends pointed at your web page and I ordered up Anatrim at the time. The results were splendid, my appetite became normal, I was in a good mood oftener, and, of course, I tightened my belt with no regrets. And the sex became fantastic, too!" Mike There many and many sincere gratitudes left by delighted people taking Anatrim. Don't you wanna join the thousands and thousands of slender buyers and try this natural appetite-suppressing energy lifting product now! Do not decline the preposition! http://www.noatban.net/?kounmwmzmxllu ------------E5BD371096ECFF Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Anatrim - The up-to-the-moment and most delighting lose flesh product is now available - As you could see on BBC.
Can you count up all the times when you said to yourself you would do anything to get rid of this fastly growing pounds of fat? Happily, now no big price is to be paid. With Anatrim, the ground-shaking kilos-melting combination of elements, you can get naturally health life style and become really slimmer. Just look at what people say!

"It's quite difficult to admit it but I was a junk food addict. I greedily swallowed up all this garbige and was unable to stop. This fatal passion finished after I started taking Anatrim! Oh, God, my appetite decreased, mood improved and I'm the happiest person in the world 28 pounds in 2.2 months. So, I can tell you now I became the happiest person!"

Amelia B., Las Vegas

"Since the very childhood I was a bulky boy. You can't even fancy how I hated being mocked at school. I detested my weight and I hated even myself. After trying many different remedies I heard about Anatrim. It literally dragged me out of this terrible nightmare! The warmest thanks to you, guys."

Mikkey Fox, San Francisco

"Do you know what? Thanks to Anatrim my marriage was saved! I went into this circle, depression - more eating - more depression. My wife was about to leave me as I was turning in overweight psycho. Once one of my friends pointed at your web page and I ordered up Anatrim at the time. The results were splendid, my appetite became normal, I was in a good mood oftener, and, of course, I tightened my belt with no regrets. And the sex became fantastic, too!"

Mike

There many and many sincere gratitudes left by delighted people taking Anatrim. Don't you wanna join the thousands and thousands of slender buyers and try this natural appetite-suppressing energy lifting product now!
Do not decline the preposition!

http://www.noatban.net/?kounmwmzmxllu ------------E5BD371096ECFF-- From murtymix@bigpond.com Sat Oct 13 15:31:17 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Igmhh-0006ZM-NR for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 13 Oct 2007 15:31:17 -0400 Received: from [59.144.47.167] (helo=DSL-KK-STATIC-167.47.144.59.airtelbroadband.in) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Igmhf-0007yb-WF for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 13 Oct 2007 15:31:17 -0400 Received: from [41.190.42.79] (helo=yrs) by DSL-KK-STATIC-167.47.144.59.airtelbroadband.in with smtp (Exim 4.62 (FreeBSD)) id 1JHzIr-0004bb-Jm; Sun, 14 Oct 2007 01:10:57 -0700 Message-ID: <003001c80e39$18e2ca60$4f2abe29@yrs> From: To: Subject: I've got something you have to see Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 01:06:17 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="windows-1250"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Spam-Score: 1.6 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 68c8cc8a64a9d0402e43b8eee9fc4199 On The Right Track, And Moving Fast! Physical Property Holdings Inc. PPYH $0.25 Hong Kong is now Physicals #1 Priority, as they work fast in their new found focus. Recent releases have already shown how fast they are grabbing property. Take an hour out this weekend and read over the news on them, then get your broker on the phone and tell him to move at opening bell. From TedtwilightBurton@familytreecircles.com Sat Oct 13 18:11:59 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgpDD-0008DF-NC for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 13 Oct 2007 18:11:59 -0400 Received: from 66-169-62-139.dhcp.gnvl.sc.charter.com ([66.169.62.139] helo=black.sc.charter.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgpCt-0001b5-F5 for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 13 Oct 2007 18:11:39 -0400 Received: from explosive by familytreecircles.com with SMTP id oG5fndY4Li for ; Sat, 13 Oct 2007 18:11:19 +0500 From: "Jessie Reid" To: Subject: How about a $2400 welcome bonus Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 3.7 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de $2400 welcome bonus will be deposited in your new casino account! Play your favorite games and get $2400 welcome bonus. Get $2400 you download our casino. Huge progressive jackpots, slots, multi-hand, and single-hand blackjack. http://casinocentreonline.com/ From zarstartechsib@startech.net Sat Oct 13 18:39:20 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Igpdg-0005uu-Rt; Sat, 13 Oct 2007 18:39:20 -0400 Received: from [190.40.183.252] (helo=client-190.40.183.252.speedy.net.pe) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Igpda-0004Xf-Fi; Sat, 13 Oct 2007 18:39:17 -0400 Received: from [190.40.183.252] by mx00-dom.earthlink.net; Sat, 13 Oct 2007 17:39:26 -0500 Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2007 17:39:26 -0500 From: "Edna Fair" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.71.01) Home Reply-To: zarstartechsib@startech.net X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <707301302.02857984841294@startech.net> To: 6lowpan@lists.ietf.org Subject: Customers alert, new pharma site is realised! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----------4D31FB09B2CD31" X-Spam-Score: 3.0 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 4adaf050708fb13be3316a9eee889caa ------------4D31FB09B2CD31 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In the end new web-site is realized!!! *Mankind’s health *Anti-Depressant pharmaceutics *Pain Alleviation *Women's Health *Anti-Diabetics *High blood pressure/Cholesterin problems *Anti-Allergic/Asthma medicinal preparations *Anti gastric Acidity As our respective client now you can first to anybody test our sweet offer!! FDA, CPA Tested, Visa Ratified. Elicit just now!!! http://roadcaught.cn/ ------------4D31FB09B2CD31 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In the end new web-site is realized!!!
*Mankind’s health
*Anti-Depressant pharmaceutics
*Pain Alleviation
*Women's Health
*Anti-Diabetics
*High blood pressure/Cholesterin problems
*Anti-Allergic/Asthma medicinal preparations
*Anti gastric Acidity
As our respective client now you can first to anybody test our sweet offer!!
FDA, CPA Tested, Visa Ratified.

Elicit just now!!!

http://roadcaught.cn/ ------------4D31FB09B2CD31-- From vydstonebridgecomsug@stonebridgecom.com Mon Oct 15 03:40:51 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhKZH-0006vu-5C; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 03:40:51 -0400 Received: from softicom.vlan218.raven.lubman.net.pl ([212.182.95.168] helo=strojek.softicom.lublin.pl) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhKZ2-00056B-6F; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 03:40:48 -0400 Received: from [212.182.95.168] by mx.stonebridgecom.com; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 08:40:55 +0100 Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 08:40:55 +0100 From: "James Avila" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.62.03) Home Reply-To: vydstonebridgecomsug@stonebridgecom.com X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <052824839.58619104847400@stonebridgecom.com> To: 6lowpan@lists.ietf.org Subject: Legal software sales MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----------5B67125425425B" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 4d87d2aa806f79fed918a62e834505ca ------------5B67125425425B Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Our purpose is to render PC and Macintosh legal soft and computer solutions of low price to suit best any budget. Whether you're a corporate client, a small-scale enterprise owner, or go shopping for your home personal computer, we guess we can help you. VIEW WHAT WE HAVE TO PROPOSE http://bfebycq.greatestoemsoft.com/ Most demanding products are: *StuffIt Deluxe 10 for Mac: Retail price for today - $79.99; Our only now - $19.95 *Microsoft SQL Server 2005 Developer Edition: Retail price for this time - $885.95; Our for today - $69.95 *Autodesk Architectural Desktop 2006: Retail price this time - $4695.00; Our only - $119.95 *Symantec Norton Internet Security 2005: Retail price today - $69.95; Our just - $39.95 *Adobe Dreamweaver CS3: Retail price for this day - $399.00; Our only - $59.95 *Adobe FrameMaker 7.0: Retail price this time - $799.99; Our only - $49.95 *Macromedia Contribute 3.11: Retail price this day - $149.00; Our just today - $39.95 *Corel Photobook 10.3: Retail price this time - $160.00; Our only - $29.95 COME TO US! http://bfebycq.greatestoemsoft.com/ ------------5B67125425425B Content-Type: text/html; charset=Windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Our purpose is to render PC and Macintosh legal soft and computer solutions of low price to suit best any budget.
Whether you're a corporate client, a small-scale enterprise owner,
or go shopping for your home personal computer, we guess we can help you.
VIEW WHAT WE HAVE TO PROPOSE

http://bfebycq.greatestoemsoft.com/
Most demanding products are:
*StuffIt Deluxe 10 for Mac: Retail price for today - $79.99; Our only now - $19.95
*Microsoft SQL Server 2005 Developer Edition: Retail price for this time - $885.95; Our for today - $69.95
*Autodesk Architectural Desktop 2006: Retail price this time - $4695.00; Our only - $119.95
*Symantec Norton Internet Security 2005: Retail price today - $69.95; Our just - $39.95
*Adobe Dreamweaver CS3: Retail price for this day - $399.00; Our only - $59.95
*Adobe FrameMaker 7.0: Retail price this time - $799.99; Our only - $49.95
*Macromedia Contribute 3.11: Retail price this day - $149.00; Our just today - $39.95
*Corel Photobook 10.3: Retail price this time - $160.00; Our only - $29.95
COME TO US!
http://bfebycq.greatestoemsoft.com/ ------------5B67125425425B-- From vydstoyanovsug@stoyanov.com Mon Oct 15 05:45:41 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhMW5-0003FE-01; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 05:45:41 -0400 Received: from [222.252.233.33] (helo=localhost) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhMW1-0002Af-2Y; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 05:45:38 -0400 Received: from [222.252.233.33] by stoyanov.com; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 16:45:56 +0700 Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 16:45:56 +0700 From: "Octavio Mcknight" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.80.03) Educational Reply-To: vydstoyanovsug@stoyanov.com X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <642349322.14282645513483@stoyanov.com> To: 6lowpan@lists.ietf.org Subject: Hey man, stop throwing away your money MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----------B2CDACD3946EEE" X-Spam-Score: 4.6 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: a7d6aff76b15f3f56fcb94490e1052e4 ------------B2CDACD3946EEE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit After all the genuine stuff - with no rip offs! P.E.P. are tasting hot right now! This is the real thing not an imitation! One of the very originals, absolutely unique stuff is on the market at any place! Pay attention to just what people tell about this stuff: "I was really impressed how fast your stuff affected on my boyfriend, he can't put an end to his talking about how hot he is having such new calibre, extent, and libido!" Silvia D., Las Vegas "At the beginning I considered the gratuitous specimen I acquired was some kind of joke, until I tried to take the P.E.P. I can’t describe describe how plume I am with the results I achieved from using the remedy for 2 short months. I'll be requesting regularly!" Dave Klark, Las Vegas Look at more references about this amazing product here now! http://www.lpiqum.com/?mnadfcrexfi ------------B2CDACD3946EEE Content-Type: text/html; charset=Windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit After all the genuine stuff - with no rip offs!
P.E.P. are tasting hot right now! This is the real thing not an imitation!
One of the very originals, absolutely unique stuff is on the market at any place!
Pay attention to just what people tell about this stuff:

"I was really impressed how fast your stuff affected on my boyfriend, he can't put an end to his talking about how hot he is having such new calibre, extent, and libido!"

Silvia D., Las Vegas

"At the beginning I considered the gratuitous specimen I acquired was some kind of joke, until I tried to take the P.E.P. I can’t describe describe how plume I am with the results I achieved from using the remedy for 2 short months. I'll be requesting regularly!"

Dave Klark, Las Vegas
Look at more references about this amazing product here now!
http://www.lpiqum.com/?mnadfcrexfi ------------B2CDACD3946EEE-- From maimplement@kaunostours.com Mon Oct 15 09:38:25 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhQ9J-0003lr-5w; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 09:38:25 -0400 Received: from [83.218.215.21] (helo=21-215-218-83.globnet.md) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhQ9E-0000Zi-G0; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 09:38:23 -0400 Received: from vika ([138.123.182.82]:11690 "HELO vika" smtp-auth: TLS-CIPHER: TLS-PEER-CN1: ) by 15d7da53kaunostours.com with ESMTP id 68238C4948F6A2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Oct 2007 16:38:34 +0300 Message-ID: <001801c80f49$d3c76af0$07807a9c@vika> From: Rebecca To: iporpr-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: And a grid Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 16:38:34 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0015_01C80F49.D3C76AF0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.1106 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.1158 X-Spam-Score: 0.6 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 9ed51c9d1356100bce94f1ae4ec616a9 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C80F49.D3C76AF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Billy has developed his expertise with the cordless 'phone to the will provide invaluable clues to the future. Eventually we are regarded as = just a tool. If for some reason the power shut off, ------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C80F49.D3C76AF0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

the more ingaged you become. You seem to be cought up in the
<= /P>

Are you wanting a bigger p_ e >n _is?

As se _e -n on T _V

Over 796,000 Men around the world are already satisfied
Gain 2+ Inches In Leng _th
Increase Your P _en -is Wi _dth (Girth) By up _to 28%
100% Safe To Take, With NO Side Effects
No Pum _ps! No Su _rgery! No Exercises!
*3 F _RE >E Bottles

View, Then And Now Pics<= /DIV>

or speech, devices to stimulate our senses of sight, hearing,
------=_NextPart_000_0015_01C80F49.D3C76AF0-- From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Mon Oct 15 10:00:36 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhQNf-0002wb-5y; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 09:53:15 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IhQNd-0002tw-Sh for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 09:53:13 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhQNd-0002tM-8h; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 09:53:13 -0400 Received: from mail.ca.certicom.com ([38.113.160.197]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhQNU-00019m-Af; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 09:53:13 -0400 Received: from spamfilter.certicom.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.ca.certicom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0439810027FE3; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 09:52:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.ca.certicom.com ([127.0.0.1]) by spamfilter.certicom.com (storm.certicom.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yKl6U5mdYyX4; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 09:52:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from domino1.certicom.com (domino1.certicom.com [10.0.1.24]) by mail.ca.certicom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 09:52:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [10.24.0.102] ([10.24.0.102]) by domino1.certicom.com (Lotus Domino Release 7.0.2FP2 HF177) with ESMTP id 2007101509523691-87682 ; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 09:52:36 -0400 Message-ID: <47137114.1040906@certicom.com> Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 09:54:28 -0400 From: Chinh Nguyen User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com Subject: Re: [IPsec] Re: Last call comments for draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 References: In-Reply-To: X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on Certicom1/Certicom(Release 7.0.2FP2 HF177|August 10, 2007) at 10/15/2007 09:52:36 AM, Serialize by Router on Certicom1/Certicom(Release 7.0.2FP2 HF177|August 10, 2007) at 10/15/2007 09:52:37 AM, Serialize complete at 10/15/2007 09:52:37 AM Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: cab78e1e39c4b328567edb48482b6a69 Cc: ipsec@ietf.org, kent@bbn.com, paul.hoffman@vpnc.org, mlepinski@bbn.com, ietf@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com wrote: > Paul Hoffman wrote: > >>> 2) For IKEv1/IKEv2, the document should explicitly specify how >>> ECC points are converted to octet strings (for KE payloads >>> and resulting shared secret value). Currently, there are at >>> least three incompatible options (RFC 4753, RFC 2409, and >>> draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups-10 drafts). I'd suggest just >>> saying "the same way as in RFC 4753". >> This bodes really poorly for interoperability. >> draft-lepinski-dh-groups needs to be revised to specify one of the >> methods, and that needs to be discussed on the IPsec mailing list. >> I would not assume that implementers would prefer RFC 4753 over >> draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups. > > I suggested "the same way as in RFC 4753" not because I particularly > prefer that point-to-octet-string conversion method, but because I > would prefer not having three different methods (two is bad enough). > > (Note that the current ecc-groups-10 draft actually tries to > modify the definitions of groups 19/20/21 from RFC 4753: it > reuses the same numbers but with different point-to-octet-string > conversion method.) Note that interoperability issues involve more than the representation of the ECC point (KE payload in IKE). The shared secret is also different between RFC 4753 (x + y) and draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups (x only). This has implications for the generation of the symmetric keys. I believe that the representation in draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups is more widely used including other standards such as SEC, FIPS 186-2, IEEE 1363, and ANSI X9.62. D. Brown at Certicom is writing an update to draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups which attempts to resolve this interoperability issue. In a nutshell, both formats are supported. Practically speaking when it comes to IKE, the responder supports both format and chooses the format based on the one chosen by the initiator. Regards, Chinh -- http://www.certicom.com _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Mon Oct 15 12:34:16 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhSqc-0002c3-58; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 12:31:18 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IhSqZ-0002bk-5L for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 12:31:15 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhSqY-0002aw-2L for ipsec@ietf.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 12:31:14 -0400 Received: from mail.ca.certicom.com ([38.113.160.197]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhSqU-0004ko-1f for ipsec@ietf.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 12:31:13 -0400 Received: from spamfilter.certicom.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.ca.certicom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B65E610027FE3; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 12:31:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.ca.certicom.com ([127.0.0.1]) by spamfilter.certicom.com (storm.certicom.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IMA+Ws8qAOtW; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 12:31:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from domino1.certicom.com (domino1.certicom.com [10.0.1.24]) by mail.ca.certicom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 12:31:00 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <47137114.1040906@certicom.com> To: ipsec@ietf.org Subject: Re: [IPsec] Re: Last call comments for draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.5 November 30, 2005 Message-ID: From: Daniel Brown Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 12:30:51 -0400 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Certicom1/Certicom(Release 7.0.2FP2 HF177|August 10, 2007) at 10/15/2007 12:30:52 PM Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=_mixed 005ABA1285257375_=" X-Spam-Score: 2.6 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 9ea58f9afed4c81098229b1759fb296b Cc: Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com, kent@bbn.com, mlepinski@bbn.com, paul.hoffman@vpnc.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org --=_mixed 005ABA1285257375_= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 005ABA1285257375_=" --=_alternative 005ABA1285257375_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Hi, Attached is the draft I prepared a while back in an attempt to address Working Last Call comments. As Chinh states, one of the goals of this draft is to allow both the 4753 approach, and the older approach (i.e. ANSI/IEEE/SECG point representation and NIST/ANSI/IEEE/SECG key derivation), in such a way that the approach is determined independently of the group. Comments are welcome on whether this is worthwhile goal, and if so, better ways to attain this goal. Best regards, Dan Brown (905) 501-3857 http://www.certicom.com Chinh Nguyen wrote on 10/15/2007 09:54:28 AM: > Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com wrote: > > Paul Hoffman wrote: > > > >>> 2) For IKEv1/IKEv2, the document should explicitly specify how > >>> ECC points are converted to octet strings (for KE payloads > >>> and resulting shared secret value). Currently, there are at > >>> least three incompatible options (RFC 4753, RFC 2409, and > >>> draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups-10 drafts). I'd suggest just > >>> saying "the same way as in RFC 4753". > >> This bodes really poorly for interoperability. > >> draft-lepinski-dh-groups needs to be revised to specify one of the > >> methods, and that needs to be discussed on the IPsec mailing list. > >> I would not assume that implementers would prefer RFC 4753 over > >> draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups. > > > > I suggested "the same way as in RFC 4753" not because I particularly > > prefer that point-to-octet-string conversion method, but because I > > would prefer not having three different methods (two is bad enough). > > > > (Note that the current ecc-groups-10 draft actually tries to > > modify the definitions of groups 19/20/21 from RFC 4753: it > > reuses the same numbers but with different point-to-octet-string > > conversion method.) > > Note that interoperability issues involve more than the representation > of the ECC point (KE payload in IKE). The shared secret is also > different between RFC 4753 (x + y) and draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups > (x only). This has implications for the generation of the symmetric keys. > > I believe that the representation in draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups is > more widely used including other standards such as SEC, FIPS 186-2, IEEE > 1363, and ANSI X9.62. > > D. Brown at Certicom is writing an update to > draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups which attempts to resolve this > interoperability issue. In a nutshell, both formats are supported. > Practically speaking when it comes to IKE, the responder supports both > format and chooses the format based on the one chosen by the initiator. > > Regards, > > Chinh > > -- > http://www.certicom.com > > > _______________________________________________ > IPsec mailing list > IPsec@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec --=_alternative 005ABA1285257375_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Hi,

Attached is the draft I prepared a while back in an attempt to address Working Last Call comments.

As Chinh states, one of the goals of this draft is to allow both the 4753 approach, and the older approach (i.e. ANSI/IEEE/SECG point representation and NIST/ANSI/IEEE/SECG key derivation), in such a way that the approach is determined independently of the group.

Comments are welcome on whether this is worthwhile goal, and if so, better ways to attain this goal.




Best regards,

Dan Brown
(905) 501-3857
http://www.certicom.com


Chinh Nguyen <cnguyen@certicom.com> wrote on 10/15/2007 09:54:28 AM:

> Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com wrote:
> > Paul Hoffman wrote:
> >
> >>> 2) For IKEv1/IKEv2, the document should explicitly specify how
> >>> ECC points are converted to octet strings (for KE payloads
> >>> and resulting shared secret value). Currently, there are at
> >>> least three incompatible options (RFC 4753, RFC 2409, and
> >>> draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups-10 drafts). I'd suggest just
> >>> saying "the same way as in RFC 4753".
> >> This bodes really poorly for interoperability.
> >> draft-lepinski-dh-groups needs to be revised to specify one of the
> >> methods, and that needs to be discussed on the IPsec mailing list.
> >> I would not assume that implementers would prefer RFC 4753 over
> >> draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups.
> >
> > I suggested "the same way as in RFC 4753" not because I particularly
> > prefer that point-to-octet-string conversion method, but because I
> > would prefer not having three different methods (two is bad enough).
> >
> > (Note that the current ecc-groups-10 draft actually tries to
> > modify the definitions of groups 19/20/21 from RFC 4753: it
> > reuses the same numbers but with different point-to-octet-string
> > conversion method.)
>
> Note that interoperability issues involve more than the representation
> of the ECC point (KE payload in IKE). The shared secret is also
> different between RFC 4753 (x + y) and draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups
> (x only). This has implications for the generation of the symmetric keys.
>
> I believe that the representation in draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups is
> more widely used including other standards such as SEC, FIPS 186-2, IEEE
> 1363, and ANSI X9.62.
>
> D. Brown at Certicom is writing an update to
> draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups which attempts to resolve this
> interoperability issue. In a nutshell, both formats are supported.
> Practically speaking when it comes to IKE, the responder supports both
> format and chooses the format based on the one chosen by the initiator.
>
> Regards,
>
> Chinh
>
> --
> http://www.certicom.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> IPsec mailing list
> IPsec@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
--=_alternative 005ABA1285257375_=-- --=_mixed 005ABA1285257375_= Content-Type: text/plain; name="draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups-10-WGLC-0.txt" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups-10-WGLC-0.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =0ANetwork Working Group D. Brown, Certicom= =0AINTERNET-DRAFT October 10, 2006= =0AExpires: April 10, 2007=0A=0A Additional ECC Groups For I= KE and IKEv2=0A =0A=0A Status of this Memo=0A=0A By submitting= this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any=0A applicable paten= t or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware=0A have been or will be= disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes=0A aware will be disclosed= , in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.=0A=0A Internet-Drafts are worki= ng documents of the Internet Engineering=0A Task Force (IETF), its areas,= and its working groups. Note that=0A other groups may also distribute w= orking documents as=0A Internet-Drafts.=0A=0A Internet-Drafts are draft= documents valid for a maximum of six months=0A and may be updated, repla= ced, or obsoleted by other documents at any=0A time. It is inappropriate= to use Internet-Drafts as reference=0A material or to cite them other th= an as "work in progress."=0A=0A The list of current Internet-Drafts can b= e accessed at=0A http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.=0A=0A The = list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at=0A http://ww= w.ietf.org/shadow.html.=0A=0A This Internet-Draft will expire on April 10= , 2007.=0A=0A Abstract=0A=0A This document = describes additional elliptic curve groups for use=0A in IKE (as defined = in RFC 2409) and IKEv2 (as defined in RFC 4306).=0A These groups are defi= ned to align IKE and IKEv2 with other ECC=0A implementations and standard= s, and in addition, many of them=0A provide higher strength than the prev= iously defined Oakley=0A groups.=0A=0A1. Introduction=0A=0AThis document= describes groups for use in elliptic curve=0ADiffie-Hellman in IKE in addi= tion to the Oakley groups included in=0A[IKE], [IKEv2], and [MODP-IKE]. Th= e document assumes that the reader=0Ais familiar with the IKE protocol and = the concept of Oakley Groups, as=0Adefined in RFC 2409 [IKE] and IKEv2 [IKE= v2]. The ECC groups given=0Ahere are among the fifteen groups that NIST re= commends in FIPS 186-2=0A[FIPS-186-2].=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0ABrown = [Page 1]=0A=0C=0AINTERNET-DR= AFT Additional ECC Groups for IKE and IKEv2 January 2006=0A=0ARFC2409 [= IKE] defines four standard Oakley Groups - two modular=0Aexponentiation gro= ups and two elliptic curve groups over GF[2^N]. One=0Amodular exponentiati= on group (768 bits - Oakley Group 1) is mandatory=0Afor all implementations= to support, while the other three are optional.=0ABoth elliptic curve grou= ps (Oakley Groups 3 and 4) are defined over=0AGF[2^N] with N composite.=0A= =0AAdditional groups that can be used with IKE and IKEv2 are defined in=0A[= MODP-IKE].=0A=0AThis document describes all fifteen elliptic curve groups r= ecommended=0Aby NIST in [FIPS-186-2].=0A=0AThe reasons for supporting the 1= 5 NIST ellipitc curve groups are for=0Abetter alignment with other standard= s, such as [FIPS 186-2], [X9.62],=0A[X9.63], and [SEC-2]. Some of these gr= oups also afford efficiency=0Aadvantages in hardware applications since the= underlying arithmetic is=0Abinary field arithmetic. The groups described = are capable of providing=0Asecurity consistent with both the new Advanced E= ncryption Standard=0A[FIPS-197] and with Triple DES [SP-800-67].=0A=0AThese= groups could also be defined with the New Group Mode but=0Aincluding them = in this document will encourage interoperability of IKE=0Aand IKEv2 impleme= ntations based on elliptic curve groups.=0A=0AThe key words "MUST", "MUST N= OT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",=0A"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMEND= ED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this=0Adocument are to be interpreted as desc= ribed in [MUST].=0A=0A2. The Additional Elliptic Curve Groups=0A=0AThe gro= ups given in this document are capable of providing security=0Aconsistent w= ith AES keys of 128, 192, and 256 bits, and also with 3DES=0Akeys of length= s 168, whose corresponding strengths is often rated at=0A112 bits. Additio= nally a lower security level, of 80 bits, is also=0Asupported for backwards= compatability. The following table, based on=0Atables from [HOF] and [LEN= ], gives approximate comparable key sizes=0Afor security stregnths for sele= cted ECC key sizes by comparison=0Asymmetric key sizes. The estimates are = based on the running times of=0Athe best algorithms known today.=0A=0A=0A= =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0ABrown = [Page 2]=0A=0C=0AINTERNET-DRAFT Additional ECC Groups f= or IKE and IKEv2 January 2006=0A=0A Strength ECC2N = ECP =0A -------- ----- ---=0A = 80 163 192 =0A 112 233 224 =0A = 128 283 256 =0A 192 = 409 384 =0A 256 571 521 =0A = =0A Table 1: Comparable key sizes=0A =0AThus, for e= xample, when securing a 192-bit symmetric key, it is=0Aprudent to use eithe= r 409-bit ECC2N or 384-bit ECP. With smaller ECC=0Akey sizes the symmetric= keys would be underprotected.=0A=0AThe fifteen groups described in this do= cument use elliptic curves over=0AGF[2^N] with N prime or over GF[P] with P= prime. This addresses=0Aconcerns expressed by many experts regarding curv= es defined over=0AGF[2^N] with N composite -- concerns highlighted by the r= ecent attacks=0Aon such curves due to Gaudry, Hess, and Smart [WEIL] and du= e to=0AJacobson, Menezes and Stein [JMS].=0A=0ASeven of the groups describe= d here have been assigned identifiers by=0AIANA [IANA] and the remaining ei= ght might later be assigned=0Aidentifiers by IANA. A brief summary of the = IANA identified groups=0Afor IKE follows. Groups with IANA numbers 1 throu= gh 4 are identified=0Ain [IKE]. The group with IANA number 5 is identified= in [MODP-IKE].=0AThe group with IANA number 6 is identified in [X9.62] and= [SEC 2] with=0Aobject identifier sect163r1, but it is not one of the fifte= en curves=0Athat NIST recommends [FIPS-186-2]. Nevertheless, it is include= d here=0Afor backwards interoperability with existing implementations. Gro= ups=0A19, 20 and 21 are defined [ECP-IKE]. The remaining NIST recommended= =0Agroups are suggested and anticipated to be assigned IANA numbers as=0Asp= ecified in Table 2.=0A=0A id Group Type Group Description NIST Name SE= C 2 OID=0A -- ---------- ----------------- --------- ---------=0A=0A = 22 2 ECP ECPRGF192Random P-192 secp192r1 =0A 23 3 EC2N = EC2NGF163Random B-163 sect163r2=0A 7 3 EC2N EC2NGF163Kob= litz K-163 sect163k1=0A 6 3 EC2N EC2NGF163Random2 none = sect163r1=0A=0A 24 2 ECP ECPRGF224Random P-224 secp224r1= =0A 25 3 EC2N EC2NGF233Random B-233 sect233r1=0A 26 3 E= C2N EC2NGF233Koblitz K-233 sect233k1=0A=0A 19 2 ECP ECPR= GF256Random P-256 secp256r1=0A 8 3 EC2N EC2NGF283Random = B-283 sect283r1=0A 9 3 EC2N EC2NGF283Koblitz K-283 sect= 283k1=0A=0A=0A=0ABrown = [Page 3]=0A=0C=0AINTERNET-DRAFT Additional ECC Groups for IKE and IK= Ev2 January 2006=0A=0A 20 2 ECP ECPRGF384Random P-384 sec= p384r1=0A 10 3 EC2N EC2NGF409Random B-409 sect409r1=0A 11 = 3 EC2N EC2NGF409Koblitz K-409 sect409k1=0A=0A 21 2 ECP = ECPRGF521Random P-521 secp521r1=0A 12 3 EC2N EC2NGF571Random= B-571 sect571r1=0A 13 3 EC2N EC2NGF571Koblitz K-571 = sect571k1=0A=0A Table 2. Recommended Groups and Names=0A=0AGenerall= y, three curves are defined at each strength. Two curves=0Achosen verifiab= ly at random, which helps security in that the elliptic=0Acurve is thereby = unlikely to belong to some rare but weak classe of=0Acurves. One verifiabl= y random is defined over a prime field, and=0Aanother over a prime field. = The third curve is Koblitz curve defined=0Aover a binary field. These curv= es are special curves with some=0Aefficient implementation properties due t= o the special structure of=0Athe curve [KOB] and [SOL]. Generally speaking= , curves defined over=0Aprime field are more efficient than those over bina= ry fields when=0Aimplemented software, because typical platforms for softwa= re have=0Abuilt-in 32-bit integer multipliers or better. In hardware=0Aimp= lementations, binary fields potentially offer more efficient=0Aimplementati= on.=0A=0AFor elliptic curve groups implemented in accordance with this=0Ado= cument, the data in the KE payload when using this group SHOULD be=0Athe oc= tet string representation specified in [SEC1], Section 2.3.3=0A(this repres= entation is also specified in [X9.62], [X9.63],=0A[FIPS-186-2], and [IEEE-1= 363]) of the point on the curve chosen by=0Ataking the randomly chosen secr= et Ka and computing Ka*G, where * is=0Athe repetition of the group addition= . =0A=0AIn this representation, a leading octet with value 02,03, or 04,= =0Aindicates whether the point is compressed and uncompressed, and if=0Acom= pressed, which of the two choices for the y-coordinate. The=0Acoordinates = are represented as octet strings consisting of initial=0Apadding of zero bi= ts, if needed, followed by a bit string of length=0Acorresponding to the fi= eld size. For binary fields, a polynomial=0Abasis representation is used, = with irreducible polynomials specified=0Ain this document in the correspond= ing subsection describing the group.=0A=0AAlternatively, the data in the KE= payload MAY be the represented as=0Adescribe in [ECP-IKE]. Implementation= s of this specification MUST be=0Aable to understand both formats. The len= gth of the KE payload can=0Aeasily be used to determine which format is bei= ng used. =0A=0AIf the initiator chooses secret i and the responder chooses= secret r,=0Athen the KEi is i*G and KEr is r*G, where G is the generator o= f the=0Agroup. The formatting of KEr is identical to that for KEi.=0A=0A= =0A=0ABrown [Page = 4]=0A=0C=0AINTERNET-DRAFT Additional ECC Groups for IKE and IKEv2 Janua= ry 2006=0A=0AThe raw shared secret is the x-coordinate (only) of (ir)*G, us= ing the=0Asame representation of field elements as octet strings that is us= ed=0Athe x-coordinate inside of KEi and KEr. An exception to this is that= =0Aif the KE payload is formatted according to [ECP-IKE], then the format= =0Aof [ECP-IKE] is used for the shared secret, which also includes the y=0A= coordinate in the value of the shared secret.=0A=0ANote that the format of = the KE payload and the shared secret differs=0Afrom the format defined for = Oakley groups 3 and 4 define in [IKE].=0A=0AImplementations of this documen= t MUST support one of the groups in=0ATable 2. The groups in Table 2 are a= rranged to 5 classes,=0Acorresponding to approximately equivalent security = strength. To=0Aencourage interoperability, implementations that support on= e of these=0Aclasses, SHOULD support the one group in that class that is de= fined=0Aover a prime field (which will be one of P-192, P-224, P-256, P-384= ,=0Aor P-521). Implementations SHOULD support one of P-256 or P-384.=0AImp= lementations MAY support any set of groups.=0A =0AThe groups are now descri= bed in greater detail. The order follows the=0Aproposed id number of the g= roup, which does match not the order of=0ATable 2 (based on security) for h= istorical reasons. Group 19, 20 and=0A21 have already been defined in [ECP= -IKE], but are re-defined here for=0Acompleteness and to illustrate the KE = payload and shared secret=0Aformats.=0A =0A=0A2.1 Group EC2NGF163Random2=0A= =0AIKE and IKEv2 implementations MAY support an EC2N group with the=0Afollo= wing characteristics. This group is assigned id 6 (six). The=0Acurve is bas= ed on the Galois Field GF[2^163]. The field size is=0A163. The irreducible = polynomial used to represent the field is:=0A=0A u^163 + u^7 + u^= 6 + u^3 + 1.=0A=0AThe equation for the elliptic curve is:=0A=0A y= ^2 + xy =3D x^3 + ax^2 + b.=0A=0AGroup Curve a:=0A=0A07b6882c aaefa84f 9554= ff84 28bd88e2 46d2782a e2=0A=0AGroup Curve b:=0A=0A0713612d cddcb40a ab946b= da 29ca91f7 3af958af d9=0A=0AGroup Generator G: =0A=0A=0A=0ABrown = [Page 5]=0A=0C=0AINTERNET-D= RAFT Additional ECC Groups for IKE and IKEv2 January 2006=0A=0A03036997= 9697ab43 89778956 6789567f 787a7876 a654=0A=0AThe order of the generator G= defined above is the prime:=0A=0A03ffffff ffffffff ffffff48 aab689c2 9ca71= 027 9b=0A=0AThe curve order is twice this prime.=0A=0AThe group was chosen = verifiably at random using SHA-1 as specified in=0A[X9.62] from the seed:= =0A=0A24b7b137 c8a14d69 6e676875 6151756f d0da2e5c =0A=0AHowever, for histo= rical reasons, the method to generate the group from=0Athe seed differs sli= ghtly from the method described in=0A[X9.62]. Specifically the coefficient = Group Curve b produced from the=0Aseed is the reverse of the coefficient th= at would have been produced=0Aby the method described in [X9.62].=0A=0A2.2 = Group EC2NGF163Koblitz=0A=0AIKE and IKEv2 implementations MAY support an EC= 2N group with the=0Afollowing characteristics. This group is assigned id 7 = (seven). The=0Acurve is based on the Galois Field GF[2^163]. The field size= is=0A163. The irreducible polynomial used to represent the field is:=0A=0A= u^163 + u^7 + u^6 + u^3 + 1.=0A=0AThe equation for the elliptic = curve is:=0A=0A y^2 + xy =3D x^3 + x^2 + 1.=0A=0AGroup Generator = G: =0A=0A0302fe13 c0537bbc 11acaa07 d793de4e 6d5e5c94 eee8=0A=0AThe order o= f the generator G is the prime:=0A=0A04000000 00000000 00000201 08a2e0cc 0d= 99f8a5 ef=0A=0AThe curve order is twice this prime.=0A=0A2.3 Group EC2NGF28= 3Random=0A=0AIKE and IKEv2 implementations MAY support an EC2N group with t= he=0Afollowing characteristics. This group is assigned id 8 (eight). The=0A= curve is based on the Galois Field GF[2^283]. The field size is=0A283. The = irreducible polynomial used to represent the field is:=0A=0A u^28= 3 + u^12 + u^7 + u^5 + 1.=0A=0A=0ABrown = [Page 6]=0A=0C=0AINTERNET-DRAFT Additional ECC Grou= ps for IKE and IKEv2 January 2006=0A=0AThe equation for the elliptic curv= e is:=0A=0A y^2 + xy =3D x^3 + x^2 + b.=0A=0AGroup Curve b:=0A=0A= 027b680a c8b8596d a5a4af8a 19a0303f ca97fd76 45309fa2 a581485a=0Af6263e31 3= b79a2f5=0A=0AGroup Generator G:=0A=0A0305f939 258db7dd 90e1934f 8c70b0df ec= 2eed25 b8557eac 9c80e2e1=0A98f8cdbe cd86b120 53=0A=0AThe order of the gener= ator G is the prime:=0A=0A03ffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffef90 3996= 60fc 938a9016=0A5b042a7c efadb307=0A=0AThe curve order is twice this prime.= =0A=0AThe group was chosen verifiably at random in normal basis=0Arepresent= ation using SHA-1 as specified in [X9.62] from the seed:=0A=0A77e2b073 70eb= 0f83 2a6dd5b6 2dfc88cd 06bb84be=0A=0A2.4 Group EC2NGF283Koblitz=0A=0AIKE an= d IKEv2 implementations MAY support an EC2N group with the=0Afollowing char= acteristics. This group is assigned id 9 (nine). The=0Acurve is based on th= e Galois Field GF[2^283]. The field size is=0A283. The irreducible polynomi= al used to represent the field is:=0A=0A u^283 + u^12 + u^7 + u^5= + 1.=0A=0AThe equation for the elliptic curve is:=0A=0A y^2 + xy= =3D x^3 + 1.=0A=0AGroup Generator G:=0A=0A02050321 3f78ca44 883f1a3b 8162f= 188 e553cd26 5f23c156 7a168769=0A13b0c2ac 24584928 36=0A=0AThe order of the= generator G is the prime:=0A=0A01ffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffe9a= e 2ed07577 265dff7f=0A94451e06 1e163c61=0A=0AThe curve order is four times = this prime.=0A=0A=0ABrown = [Page 7]=0A=0C=0AINTERNET-DRAFT Additional ECC Groups for IKE and= IKEv2 January 2006=0A=0A2.5 Group EC2NGF409Random=0A=0AIKE and IKEv2 imp= lementations MAY support an EC2N group with the=0Afollowing characteristics= . This group is assigned id 10 (ten). The=0Acurve is based on the Galois Fi= eld GF[2^409]. The field size is=0A409. The irreducible polynomial used to = represent the field is:=0A=0A u^409 + u^87 + 1.=0A=0AThe equation= for the elliptic curve is:=0A=0A y^2 + xy =3D x^3 + x^2 + b.=0A= =0AGroup Curve b:=0A=0A021a5c2c 8ee9feb5 c4b9a753 b7b476b7 fd6422ef 1f3dd67= 4 761fa99d=0A6ac27c8a 9a197b27 2822f6cd 57a55aa4 f50ae317 b13545f=0A=0AGrou= p Generator G:=0A=0A03015d48 60d088dd b3496b0c 60647562 60441cde 4af1771d 4= db01ffe=0A5b34e597 03dc255a 868a1180 515603ae ab60794e 54bb7996 a7=0A=0AThe= order of the generator G is the prime:=0A=0A10000000 00000000 00000000 000= 00000 00000000 00000000 00001e2a=0Aad6a612f 33307be5 fa47c3c9 e052f838 164c= d37d 9a21173=0A=0AThe curve order is twice this prime.=0A=0AThe curve was c= hosen verifiably at random in normal basis=0Arepresentation using SHA-1 as = specified in [X9.62] from the seed:=0A=0A4099b5a4 57f9d69f 79213d09 4c4bcd4= d 4262210b=0A=0A2.6 Group EC2NGF409Koblitz=0A=0AIKE and IKEv2 implementatio= ns MAY support an EC2N group with the=0Afollowing characteristics. This gro= up is assigned id 11 (eleven). The=0Acurve is based on the Galois Field GF[= 2^409]. The field size is=0A409. The irreducible polynomial used to represe= nt the field is:=0A=0A u^409 + u^87 + 1.=0A=0AThe equation for th= e elliptic curve is:=0A=0A y^2 + xy =3D x^3 + 1.=0A=0AGroup Gener= ator G:=0A=0A=0A=0ABrown = [Page 8]=0A=0C=0AINTERNET-DRAFT Additional ECC Groups for IKE and = IKEv2 January 2006=0A=0A030060f0 5f658f49 c1ad3ab1 890f7184 210efd09 87e3= 07c8 4c27accf=0Ab8f9f67c c2c46018 9eb5aaaa 62ee222e b1b35540 cfe90237 46=0A= =0AThe order of the generator G is the prime:=0A=0A7fffffff ffffffff ffffff= ff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff fffe5f83=0Ab2d4ea20 400ec455 7d5ed3e3 e7ca5b4= b 5c83b8e0 1e5fcf=0A=0AThe curve order is four times this prime.=0A=0A2.7 G= roup EC2NGF571Random=0A=0AIKE and IKEv2 implementations MAY support an EC2N= group with the=0Afollowing characteristics. This group is assigned id 12 (= twelve). The=0Acurve is based on the Galois Field GF[2^571]. The field size= is=0A571. The irreducible polynomial used to represent the field is:=0A=0A= u^571 + u^10 + u^5 + u^2 + 1.=0A=0AThe equation for the elliptic= curve is:=0A=0A y^2 + xy =3D x^3 + x^2 + b.=0A=0AGroup Curve b:= =0A=0A2f40e7e2 221f295d e297117b 7f3d62f5 c6a97ffc b8ceff1c d6ba8ce4=0Aa9a1= 8ad8 4ffabbd8 efa59332 be7ad675 6a66e294 afd185a7 8ff12aa5=0A20e4de73 9baca= 0c7 ffeff7f2 955727a=0A=0AGroup Generator G:=0A=0A03030300 1d34b856 296c16c= 0 d40d3cd7 750a93d1 d2955fa8 0aa5f40f=0Ac8db7b2a bdbde539 50f4c0d2 93cdd711= a35b67fb 1499ae60 038614f1=0A394abfa3 b4c850d9 27e1e776 9c8eec2d 19=0A=0AT= he order of the generator G is the prime:=0A=0A3fffffff ffffffff ffffffff f= fffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffffffff=0Affffffff fffffffe 661ce18f f5598730 80= 59b186 823851ec 7dd9ca11=0A61de93d5 174d66e8 382e9bb2 fe84e47=0A=0AThe curv= e order is twice this prime.=0A=0AThe group was chosen verifiably at random= in normal basis=0Arepresentation using SHA-1 as specified in [X9.62] from = the seed:=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0ABrown = [Page 9]=0A=0C=0AINTERNET-DRAFT Additional ECC Group= s for IKE and IKEv2 January 2006=0A=0A2aa058f7 3a0e33ab 486b0f61 0410c53a= 7f132310=0A=0A2.8 Group EC2NGF571Koblitz=0A=0AIKE and IKEv2 implementation= s MAY support an EC2N group with the=0Afollowing characteristics. This grou= p is assigned id 13=0A(thirteen). The curve is based on the Galois Field GF= [2^571]. The=0Afield size is 571. The irreducible polynomial used to repres= ent the=0Afield is:=0A=0A u^571 + u^10 + u^5 + u^2 + 1.=0A=0AThe = equation for the elliptic curve is:=0A=0A y^2 + xy =3D x^3 + 1.= =0A=0AGroup Generator G:=0A=0A02026eb7 a859923f bc821896 31f8103f e4ac9ca2 = 970012d5 d4602480=0A4801841c a4437095 8493b205 e647da30 4db4ceb0 8cbbd1ba 3= 9494776=0Afb988b47 174dca88 c7e29452 83a01c89 72=0A=0AThe order of the gene= rator G is the prime:=0A=0A20000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 000= 00000 00000000=0A00000000 00000001 31850e1f 19a63e4b 391a8db9 17f4138b 630d= 84be=0A5d639381 e91deb45 cfe778f6 37c1001=0A=0AThe group order is four time= s this prime.=0A=0A2.9 Group ECPRGF384Random=0A=0AIKE and IKEv2 implementat= ions MAY support an ECP group with the=0Afollowing characteristics. This g= roup is assigned id 22 (twenty-two).=0AThe curve is based on the integers m= odulo the generalized Mersenne=0Aprime p given by=0A=0A p = =3D 2^192 - 2^64 - 1.=0A=0AThe equation for the elliptic curve is:=0A=0A = y^2 =3D x^3 - 3 x + b.=0A=0AGroup Curve b:=0A=0A64210519 e59= c80e7 0fa7e9ab 72243049 feb8deec c146b9b1=0A=0AGroup Generator G:=0A=0A=0A= =0A=0ABrown [Page 1= 0]=0A=0C=0AINTERNET-DRAFT Additional ECC Groups for IKE and IKEv2 Janua= ry 2006=0A=0A03188da8 0eb03090 f67cbf20 eb43a188 00f4ff0a fd82ff10 12=0A=0A= The order of the generator G is the prime:=0A=0Affffffff ffffffff ffffffff = 99def836 146bc9b1 b4d22831=0A=0AThe group was chosen verifiably at random u= sing SHA-1 as specified in=0A[X9.62] from the seed:=0A=0A3045ae6f c8422f64 = ed579528 d38120ea e12196d5 =0A=0A2.10 Group EC2NGF163Random=0A=0AIKE and I= KEv2 implementations MAY support an EC2N group with the=0Afollowing charact= eristics. This group is assigned id 23=0A(twenty-three). The curve is based= on the Galois Field GF[2^163]. The=0Afield size is 163. The irreducible po= lynomial used to represent the=0Afield is:=0A=0A u^163 + u^7 + u^= 6 + u^3 + 1.=0A=0AThe equation for the elliptic curve is:=0A=0A y= ^2 + xy =3D x^3 + x^2 + b.=0A=0AGroup Curve b:=0A=0A020a6019 07b8c953 ca148= 1eb 10512f78 744a3205 fd=0A=0AGroup Generator G:=0A=0A0303f0eb a16286a2 d57= ea099 1168d499 4637e834 3e36=0A=0AThe order of the generator G above is the= prime:=0A=0A04000000 00000000 00000292 fe77e70c 12a4234c 33=0A=0AThe curve= order is twice this prime.=0A=0AThe group was chosen verifiably at random = in normal basis=0Arepresentation using SHA-1 as specified in [X9.62] from t= he seed:=0A=0A85e25bfe 5c86226c db12016f 7553f9d0 e693a268=0A=0A2.11 Group = ECPRGF224Random=0A=0AIKE and IKEv2 implementations MAY support an ECP group= with the=0Afollowing characteristics. This group is assigned id 24=0A(twe= nty-four). The curve is based on the integers modulo the=0Ageneralized Mer= senne prime p given by=0A=0A=0ABrown = [Page 11]=0A=0C=0AINTERNET-DRAFT Additional ECC Groups = for IKE and IKEv2 January 2006=0A=0A p =3D 2^224 - 2^96 = + 1.=0A=0AThe equation for the elliptic curve is:=0A=0A y^= 2 =3D x^3 - 3 x + b.=0A=0AGroup Curve b:=0A=0Ab4050a85 0c04b3ab f5413256 50= 44b0b7 d7bfd8ba 270b3943 2355ffb4=0A=0AGroup Generator G:=0A=0A02b70e0c bd6= bb4bf 7f321390 b94a03c1 d356c211 22343280 d6115c1d 21=0A=0AThe order of the= generator G is the prime:=0A=0Affffffff ffffffff ffffffff ffff16a2 e0b8f03= e 13dd2945 5c5c2a3d=0A=0AThe group was chosen verifiably at random using SH= A-1 as specified in=0A[X9.62] from the seed:=0A=0Abd713447 99d5c7fc dc45b59= f a3b9ab8f 6a948bc5 =0A=0A2.12 Group EC2NGF233Random=0A=0AIKE and IKEv2 imp= lementations MAY support an EC2N group with the=0Afollowing characteristics= . This group is assigned id 25=0A(twenty-five). The curve is based on the G= alois Field GF[2^233]. The=0Afield size is 233. The irreducible polynomial = used to represent the=0Afield is:=0A=0A u^233 + u^74 + 1.=0A=0ATh= e equation for the elliptic curve is:=0A=0A y^2 + xy =3D x^3 + x^= 2 + b.=0A=0AGroup Curve b:=0A=0A0066647e de6c332c 7f8c0923 bb58213b 333b20e= 9 ce4281fe 115f7d8f 90ad=0A=0AGroup Generator G:=0A=0A0300fac9 dfcbac83 13b= b2139 f1bb755f ef65bc39 1f8b36f8 f8eb7371 fd558b=0A=0AThe order of the gene= rator G above is the prime:=0A=0A01000000 00000000 00000000 00000013 e974e7= 2f 8a692203 1d2603cf e0d7=0A=0AThe curve order is twice this prime.=0A=0A= =0ABrown [Page 12]= =0A=0C=0AINTERNET-DRAFT Additional ECC Groups for IKE and IKEv2 January= 2006=0A=0AThe group was chosen verifiably at random in normal basis=0Arepr= esentation using SHA-1 as specified in [X9.62] from the seed:=0A=0A74d59ff0= 7f6b413d 0ea14b34 4b20a2db 049b50c3=0A=0A2.13 Group EC2NGF233Koblitz=0A=0A= IKE and IKEv2 implementations MAY support an EC2N group with the=0Afollowin= g characteristics. This group is assigned id 26=0A(twenty-six). The curve i= s based on the Galois Field GF[2^233]. The=0Afield size is 233. The irreduc= ible polynomial used to represent the=0Afield is:=0A=0A u^233 + u= ^74 + 1.=0A=0AThe equation for the elliptic curve is:=0A=0A y^2 += xy =3D x^3 + 1.=0A=0AGroup Generator G:=0A=0A02017232 ba853a7e 731af129 f2= 2ff414 9563a419 c26bf50a 4c9d6eef ad6126=0A=0AThe order of the generator G = is the prime:=0A=0A80000000 00000000 00000000 0000069d 5bb915bc d46efb1a d5= f173ab df=0A=0AThe curve order is four times this prime.=0A=0A3. Test Vecto= rs=0A=0AWhat follows is a set of test vectors, in the form:=0A=0A=0A=0Ai =3D =0A=0Ar =3D = =0A=0AKEi =3D =0A= =0AKEr =3D =0A=0AZ =3D = =0A=0AHere are the test vectors:=0A=0Asecp192r1=0A=0Ai =3D 7092e5fd 43a17f6= a 33753259 89284eba 093564e1 944e176d=0A=0A=0ABrown = [Page 13]=0A=0C=0AINTERNET-DRAFT Additio= nal ECC Groups for IKE and IKEv2 January 2006=0A=0Ar =3D d6185566 ec0b1f5= 2 cc562765 60907cb1 a8683d84 49b882ce=0A=0AKEi =3D 00000021 00160000 03841c= 98 8076d857 fdda4ccf 3bae5cf5 f521336a=0A650fdc7d c4=0A=0AKEr =3D 00000021 = 00160000 03445a52 f30ce615 c53e1175 c04db6f0 bb7a03d3=0A096e2c20 9e=0A=0AZ = =3D cac49383 d8bf6b5f d8e5d5b7 69c0a91f 68f9b5d0 91b831d8=0A=0Asecp224r1=0A= =0Ai =3D 626167f5 e4365260 7a9cc400 35c6dca7 256fa372 1a68baf4 e40f86e1=0A= =0Ar =3D 38524a05 e71d0233 61bfdb29 0b69d15b 7d8390aa 5ac837a0 c82d9f63=0A= =0AKEi =3D 00000025 00180000 029167b2 a96e1cbd e468976e 364d4d31 10c8f58f= =0A579c44a0 be3c98a1 a8=0A=0AKEr =3D 00000025 00180000 02dc7765 dea1a085 f3= f077f1 38854fe0 850ca89c=0A2e32d037 7bde2458 15=0A=0AZ =3D 7b1bf042 33c1568= 1 ba530222 1a2ce34b 18a92dbb b37cc0a7 72a91516=0A=0Asecp256r1=0A=0Ai =3D 9d= 3ae814 8192a83f 20530cb2 5edb11e8 b7ea1358 3a70ca34 5b0f571b=0A91317abe=0A= =0Ar =3D 922d3e7c 675bb9b4 d9613ff2 1793991b 3623844f 072e53d2 8a6baff8=0A9= cf85ab4=0A=0AKEi =3D 00000029 00130000 03084cc4 7b198b64 0da01bc1 0dfcfa03 = 4db89dbb=0A072ea0ae 9cd6eac6 0900ffc4 92=0A=0AKEr =3D 00000029 00130000 02b= 9528b 7eb56463 4315ebe2 f1e3e4fa bd671d8e=0A6f487b6e e35796a6 a6daaed1 f7= =0A=0AZ =3D 52c8f824 e13b4065 1b0ec4ad 8dbdb116 b15aebc4 8fbc0360 d84ff8cd= =0Ac3c73e6c=0A=0Asecp384r1=0A=0Ai =3D 52d3051d 6675ed1e 52a4e922 4fb2ad9a 9= 10358bb 9a72ddf7 d96a2383=0Abad90ef8 15f83a94 edfe52a0 1193f843 d29f1958=0A= =0Ar =3D f13ba470 9dee2f45 32b251bf b3b1b87b 1adac356 299e4ea9 472356ac=0Aa= 6ddad29 0b00f221 4740f693 c6a03c2d c52bd419=0A=0AKEi =3D 00000039 00140000 = 032991ae 8b27d708 0db61914 0023dc72 41cdbcd8=0A130de451 f9268c42 0674b816 9= 973f89b e2f3d9f3 082cb049 511457db 35=0A=0ABrown = [Page 14]=0A=0C=0AINTERNET-DRAFT Additional= ECC Groups for IKE and IKEv2 January 2006=0A=0AKEr =3D 00000039 00140000= 0270a447 c2e24022 c3a52f95 634a1705 2a02831c=0Aca790e6f 0c1feff9 515a38cf = d7c487ab d9e19e8f 4ef49b8a 4b268b1a 0f=0A=0AZ =3D f3cde42e 0e9dd289 82294ac= 1 af62cbd1 429f2899 11b3e053 5a81ebb5=0A13a2903b c53f0ecd 5c511083 5e5a4a90= 3629b0c5=0A=0Asecp521r1=0A=0Ai =3D ea78946a bd68bb79 a55f8f99 93cf5389 fbb= 0a10d 3b580624 29c6322a=0A987c957f 8854a5a4 ec636d70 2a7b0753 7341f631 9cc6= d03c 447da5e9=0Af59d2846 0caa98db eb=0A=0Ar =3D e68807bb dc90cca2 7848c6bc = 38426ddf 5b19c09d 144d0417 06bc9ed1=0Aafade9e8 1585faf9 e173f340 001016ef 8= 2ea5b4a 8b785fee 0c403a6e=0A39228df6 2a337e47 9c=0A=0AKEi =3D 0000004b 0015= 0000 0300584c 2476258d d61c0987 61710976 c4b50fc4=0Ac47177f4 2562f2d5 75bf9= 33c 7699122b c37c77da 0a7079e0 a4c2d131=0A8d337642 41e4c562 c7ff7bad 5cf0ce= 1e dddfa0=0A=0AKEr =3D 0000004b 00150000 02011483 326d756d 8600c5d8 c6a0bc6= 0 c80297c3=0A7e3368f4 5bbcf4d5 db78ad4b 1b1d8584 b019416f 92e8e65f 5fe370fb= =0A35558a61 32790304 2ae79809 5c5638e0 93a0b4=0A=0AZ =3D 006ea860 d9c8518c = e2de03a0 0a9d4c66 48cd33cb 665302c9 e41163e9=0Ab6b7eded f892c9c8 5c63d7c2 c= c76e3c2 f3cfe2fd 8cd13314 658f6f4d=0Aa6198dd9 fd99cd42 de1b=0A=0Asect163r1= =0A=0Ai =3D 647f8bc4 fa3fa625 b41456b9 1c899269 ffe277bc=0A=0Ar =3D ef8fa30= 5 ed836a8f df206e65 94f086f9 762e6f69=0A=0AKEi =3D 0000001e 00060000 0300e7= 72 d9e512e9 71a512b9 406edce9 99b50bee=0A78b2=0A=0AKEr =3D 0000001e 0006000= 0 020115ed 6148869f 8be39923 0825b220 7ee9e494=0A9381=0A=0AZ =3D 01d75dd0 1= 42db15a 25b6f802 4bab20ee 78f90f40 9f=0A=0Asect163r2=0A=0Ai =3D 027e06da 86= 4be386 2c261654 c15ec556 8e45eb7f b6=0A=0Ar =3D 03a7c88f a7363f8f f9ff1d28 = 13027089 bd96e07c 48=0A=0AKEi =3D 0000001e 00170000 0302ed80 fc3986c4 a978b= 09c 34dcbc37 6a7975b9=0A2276=0A=0A=0ABrown = [Page 15]=0A=0C=0AINTERNET-DRAFT Additional ECC G= roups for IKE and IKEv2 January 2006=0A=0AKEr =3D 0000001e 00170000 0201a= ed6 520fb246 8fb424de c3c31c4a 1fc0e1cf=0A702a=0A=0AZ =3D 07befaa4 0951cf0d= 1c972d4d f6297d5c 30b726cf 98=0A=0Asect163k1=0A=0Ai =3D 0137fb36 360a457b = 6a23b29e 11a4760a 17788180 8a=0A=0Ar =3D 010c489b bb3b602a 7df626e9 f062529= 4 b1d795a0 32=0A=0AKEi =3D 0000001e 00070000 0305be09 5b082931 8fa0e3e0 096= e31bf b829b8ee=0A95ec=0A=0AKEr =3D 0000001e 00070000 0205d9c9 45eb02de c3b7= ad1b ace077bf 37753e33=0A26b3=0A=0AZ =3D 07b13e8c 9452ab89 11368072 5df1312= 8 c055c9d3 ce=0A=0Asect233r1=0A=0Ai =3D 5b038de5 0df0f1f4 9a06c1fb 46c45d5a= c63e4541 b99df194 21c33b79 02=0A=0Ar =3D 3b48a626 65e29c5f 78ff6b77 14c1bb= 82 ad210c8c 29572eac cbdc3abb ce=0A=0AKEi =3D 00000027 00190000 0301334d 98= 78fa49 d0dbbf59 78f49e57 aeaad93a=0A1c3fbd7a 17acc369 dd68d1=0A=0AKEr =3D 0= 0000027 00190000 030158db 2605ce54 3cc42202 48bcce6c c055d8d4=0Aee4ea1e4 9e= f1b9dd 823797=0A=0AZ =3D 00b0dcfc 6d66c3d1 d987f8b0 75edc927 63257bfc baa7a= f34 b8f6242d=0A5d3c=0A=0Asect233k1=0A=0Ai =3D 4ea153c3 05784cf0 23a54756 a9= 9281e1 a8105ab8 5bb63898 0d07de46 a2=0A=0Ar =3D 424a8945 1d6cd439 305e44f0 = 6fc574ec 8268b626 560a44ee 85b624d5 89=0A=0AKEi =3D 00000027 001a0000 03014= e27 1e22edf7 df456f59 b366b846 2c5f6ef2=0A6bddfb67 ed764a5b 39e6dc=0A=0AKEr= =3D 00000027 001a0000 02014b56 33f29fdf 353ebb63 75ddffec 46f162f4=0A19d79= 62a 8d04fdb9 3e38ee=0A=0AZ =3D 00f3ef41 79b17ceb 7e041581 727d01cf 3d7423ec= 249f44d3 53d1e2de=0A7412=0A=0Asect283r1=0A=0A=0ABrown = [Page 16]=0A=0C=0AINTERNET-DRAFT Addi= tional ECC Groups for IKE and IKEv2 January 2006=0A=0Ai =3D 0294203a b755= 1182 dec6b777 f4d1c65b db752752 17a356a7 efad1303=0A55aa3f17 aeb3852f=0A=0A= r =3D 03314912 0a7d8d98 4f2c3346 d9ec8896 2f5b0545 1d5ead84 3dd278de=0Adf49= bd84 24009110=0A=0AKEi =3D 0000002d 00080000 0201959e 200deaa6 2d055e1d 4e1= 41ed7 dcdfde81=0A05708644 31cc5a28 0a229418 b8dfc4c1 86=0A=0AKEr =3D 000000= 2d 00080000 03034237 aff2fae3 1d2bed60 3ba7e0aa 9cbefee1=0A313bec69 05f40e2= 7 0cf448c3 6ec7d959 81=0A=0AZ =3D 066c0249 c890ffed a0ce0fd3 bd76a650 6423f= 868 5e649d03 5842bf25=0Aa388ec4e dd207eff=0A=0Asect283k1=0A=0Ai =3D 0902492= 4 08f4d64e 351eabe7 b9da659f 089a20a2 d19f62b9 2499a3eb=0Af2410637 4ab51b= =0A=0Ar =3D 0e2a59cb 494b4978 4436e053 2cf25ee4 44225ffd 39139bba 2e19d3ba= =0Ae482f651 368716=0A=0AKEi =3D 0000002d 00090000 02044e95 ad563972 553e8c2= 9 c89e4f57 155c1799=0A38ec1b86 4487e287 fe94a48b a59de2f4 4b=0A=0AKEr =3D 0= 000002d 00090000 030658a1 8c6946e1 9f17a1f8 eb44b461 0d0052c9=0A7cb52296 27= 38a584 38a5ecc9 6deffd84 b5=0A=0AZ =3D 0194027a d85e4075 d89247b2 e3c3500d = ebff0dce 5ad63a02 a07652df=0Ab7da3b75 afe11e88=0A=0Asect409r1=0A=0Ai =3D 18= 624d82 5f61d687 d6f7707f f35a23b3 29feea91 3ec45afe 81d79e4a=0A09b7d026 e8d= a7fb4 0f972a53 d6fa1e6f 0de235c7 81254b=0A=0Ar =3D f73eec0f 98ab794f 0633f4= ee 84cca2f8 dc1a1fde be850337 6418029c=0A5cf14e34 788d8ea3 2857128c 6729741= 3 902e9dd7 b8c730=0A=0AKEi =3D 0000003d 000a0000 02016f9e 561b996d 1d3ac272= 0e7cace8 6cc96d58=0Ac2518814 ff922096 38daee25 6e405590 cbd7a05c 2a4e24da = ec0bf005=0A777e89eb 49=0A=0AKEr =3D 0000003d 000a0000 0300ea45 1ad0be01 cde= ba8f3 b7c12708 10f8725f=0A03e76768 bd07cd78 cbd7a1c4 d354abba 3615658e f81e= 397d 99b6c261=0Aa77f7103 f5=0A=0AZ =3D 00beb0ec d7886e0b c13dead1 43621dd1 = 7133dbda e112b0f9 168ee853=0Ae259c5b0 26b4582f 6ccb69cd e62c7000 fbb3545d 2= d89e25f=0A=0A=0ABrown = [Page 17]=0A=0C=0AINTERNET-DRAFT Additional ECC Groups for IKE and IKE= v2 January 2006=0A=0Asect409k1=0A=0Ai =3D 600b86e2 0b7a66d8 af5cd1e3 a22a= dbcf 1f6e6556 3dd932af 6589d095=0A3b517a56 6f6230de 70f36839 9c13533e cba32= 924 90cbfb=0A=0Ar =3D 77d67725 0e919500 a410cbb0 2c6842d9 c12fa8a8 b57f539d= a192a025=0Ab92b4166 e317b757 64a42358 54ed3dac 477483de 03e2f2=0A=0AKEi = =3D 0000003d 000b0000 0300964b 2b145579 51de6ffe a67eec42 39a26600=0A22a45b= 26 59db5d92 4251c400 5b0d4de3 47b6fde7 6fc43bce 546d7cd4=0Af977d579 7a=0A= =0AKEr =3D 0000003d 000b0000 03016ecd 20beea51 7ae36a40 e330d8a5 6812559f= =0A5e5ffd16 fa6716f9 53814d9b f37570d7 9b180687 b5a385bf b9420f25=0A50e4b61= 3 8e=0A=0AZ =3D 00a1f44a 752e980f 3db78ee5 62786949 afa2e586 7d8cc9cf 078c8= f54=0Aa7de9107 af70fc87 6f5bd1e1 94c53e7a 56043397 ef2c8b50=0A=0Asect571r1= =0A=0Ai =3D e422d840 0d8e6299 90c7ca8b 26b74a0d 873d8d6d 906f4af6 e44c6176= =0A63327773 f0a1c5f0 355ac9dc b2c4c0b6 a13e38e1 8b35cda6 65a1e513=0A4be3604= 4 d3d38778 9e01c2be 6d0713=0A=0Ar =3D 01e58461 bb4f5bbb 737dfe61 7150968b 2= a9773e7 f4425ac5 a40a9ef4=0A280f97d7 a057b2df 91b3ccf7 7beb2990 596e998f d5= 7b3c42 a46e694f=0Aaf1923a6 b1899a70 6ce4b346 424b1b7d=0A=0AKEi =3D 00000051= 000c0000 0302c17e 8482e65e 8eafd4eb e150bf93 fd8797db=0A78b7c365 39724d69 = 79c7b2b9 428be38e 0bbf94f6 43bd6647 477a33e5=0A89cb491b 1f2015f9 bb5e5999 1= 53de52d 8150e50e c557c720 da=0A=0AKEr =3D 00000051 000c0000 03030e89 d2c1aa= 8a 278e43b8 53066adf 742fdd74=0A91414d90 7a74c011 371bdf64 dc38502f 2e18ae7= 9 ac702400 5398959d=0Ae999e259 65294561 024ff0b5 10855f27 263dd0d1 cff78cbe= b3=0A=0AZ =3D 0579791f f1725f09 c70e7378 278137c0 7dcb5c41 2b30f7ae 681a86= 81=0A41404ea9 5d945f26 d4d0da1b a3860291 5b67184e 23288e4f 3021b578=0A02821= d44 94868987 1e68cfc2 82862cc5=0A=0Asect571k1=0A=0Ai =3D 01fb96e0 fb6f5c57 = 03b258e0 32ee9cf3 fc5eb27b 37bfc797 cf7954ef=0A82e37cfa 551e5492 08af3365 8= 82343cf fc7fca72 949b3346 ff49cd32=0A51a3a172 00a0eef8 b64bce70 a5087cad=0A= =0Ar =3D 2b25d3d5 fd86cb53 a0fef2fb 4ffc4e20 f1ac33a1 47d69d45 31676dfd=0A8= a92a6b9 bf6c3437 9189eba8 7679bdee 05e0f8a4 5790fb77 e4fc47c7=0Ababe4170 83= 9a93be b58e214c 1a8470=0A=0A=0ABrown = [Page 18]=0A=0C=0AINTERNET-DRAFT Additional ECC Groups = for IKE and IKEv2 January 2006=0A=0AKEi =3D 00000051 000d0000 0301e4dc 1f= 82924e a99921ba bda3ee48 792836ec=0A1d033578 e7a3d372 f9360118 2b511589 d2a= 84d9f ab6e86d5 ea8f00dd=0Adf5c8b1c 22bbd9bc 96b191da 5bab247a f9e666e6 824f= fe2b 72=0A=0AKEr =3D 00000051 000d0000 02049667 3c15e735 aba12ea6 a1413c4e = a6e50edd=0Aec8f21b2 22df4092 5f483d85 e779f48e 3439f881 18e325f6 e3aa6e4e= =0Ae2855440 79ed2ea4 d8680b5d 9c06ab23 2944e62e 93e1cf8f 9b=0A=0AZ =3D 066c= 0d8b cf8c17f2 7d7367bf 0e8a9c29 31fa258b e3b7861a 6c021a5b=0Ab52d214a b1923= 528 0e9c6b61 bf72c20a 8d64c26a 9a4b9ff0 75fd3be6=0Abe03c33c 56e6cf3f f7517e= 5b 08dcbe65=0A=0A4. Security Considerations=0A=0ASince this document descri= bes some groups for use within IKE and=0AIKEv2, many of the security consid= erations contained within RFC 2409=0Aapply here as well.=0A=0AMany of the g= roups described in this document offer higher strength=0Athan the groups in= RFC 2409. This allows the IKE and IKEv2 to offer=0Asecurity comparable wi= th the AES algorithms.=0A=0AIn addition, since all the groups are defined o= ver GF[P] with P prime=0Aor GF[2^N] with N prime, they address the concerns= expressed regarding=0Athe elliptic curve groups included in RFC 2409, whic= h are curves=0Adefined over GF[2^N] with N composite. The work of Gaudry, = Hess, and=0ASmart [WEIL] reveal some of the weaknesses in such groups.=0A= =0A5. IANA Considerations=0A=0AThis document defines twelve new Diffie-Hell= man groups, as described=0Ain Table 2. IANA is requested to update the defi= nitions of groups=0A6..13 and add definitions of groups 22..26 in the "Grou= p Description"=0Aregistry defined in [IANA-IKE]. IANA is requested to add d= efinitions=0Aof groups 6..13 and 22..26 in the "IKEv2 Diffie-Hellman Transf= orm IDs"=0Aregistry defined in [IANA-IKEv2].=0A=0A6. Intellectual Property = Rights=0A=0AThe IETF has been notified of intellectual property rights clai= med in=0Aregard to the specification contained in this document.=0AFor more= information, consult the online list of claimed rights=0A(http://www.ietf.= org/ipr.html).=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0ABrown = [Page 19]=0A=0C=0AINTERNET-DRAFT Additiona= l ECC Groups for IKE and IKEv2 January 2006=0A=0AThe IETF takes no positi= on regarding the validity or scope of any=0Aintellectual property or other = rights that might be claimed to=0Apertain to the implementation or use of t= he technology described in=0Athis document or the extent to which any licen= se under such rights=0Amight or might not be available; neither does it rep= resent that it=0Ahas made any effort to identify any such rights. Informat= ion on the=0AIETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track an= d=0Astandards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of=0Acl= aims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of=0Alicen= ses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to=0Aobtain a ge= neral license or permission for the use of such=0Aproprietary rights by imp= lementors or users of this specification can=0Abe obtained from the IETF Se= cretariat.=0A=0A7. Acknowledgments=0A=0APasi Eronen, Eric Fung, Sam Hartman= , Alfred Hoenes, Russ Housley, Tero=0AKivinen and Stefan Santesson and prov= ided valuable comments and=0Asuggestions.=0A=0A8. References=0A=0A8.1 Norma= tive References=0A=0A[ECP-IKE] D. Fu, J. Solinas, ECP Groups for IKE and IK= Ev2,=0ARFC 4753, January 2007.=0A=0A[IKE] D. Harkins and D. Carrel, The Int= ernet Key Exchange, RFC 2409,=0ANovember 1998.=0A=0A[IKEv2] C. Kaufman, Edi= tor, Internet Key Exchange (IKEv2) Protocol,=0ARFC 4306, December 2005.=0A= =0A[IANA-IKE] Internet Assigned Numbers Authority. Internet Key Exchange= =0A(IKE) - IKE Attributes - Group Descriptions. See=0Ahttp://www.iana.org/= assignments/ipsec-registry=0A=0A[IANA-IKEv2] Internet Assigned Numbers Auth= ority. Internet Key=0AExchange Version 2 (IKEv2) Parameters - Diffie-Hellm= an Transform Ids.=0Ahttp://www.iana.org/assignments/ikev2-parameters=0A=0A[= MODP-IKE] T. Kivinen and M. Kojo, More Modular Exponential (MODP)=0ADiffie-= Hellman groups for Internet Key Exchange (IKE), rfc3526.txt,=0AMay 2003.=0A= =0A[MUST] S. Bradner, Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement=0AL= evels, RFC 2119, BCP 14.=0A=0A[SEC1] Standards for Efficient Cryptography G= roup. SEC 1 - Elliptic=0ACurve Cryptography. Ver. 1.0., 2000. See: http:/= /www.secg.org=0A=0A=0ABrown = [Page 20]=0A=0C=0AINTERNET-DRAFT Additional ECC Groups for IKE a= nd IKEv2 January 2006=0A=0A8.2 Informative References=0A=0A[IEEE-1363] In= stitute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. IEEE=0A1363-2000, Standard= for Public Key Cryptography. IEEE Microprocessor=0AStandards Committee. Au= gust 2001. See:=0Ahttp://grouper.ieee.org/groups/1363/index.html=0A=0A[KOB= ] N. Koblitz, CM curves with good cryptographic properties.=0AProceedings o= f Crypto '91. Pages 279-287. Springer-Verlag, 1992.=0A=0A[FIPS-186-2] Natio= nal Institute of Standards and Technology. Digital=0ASignature Standard (DS= S), FIPS PUB 186-2, January 2000. =0Ahttp://csrc.nist.gov/publications/fips= /fips186-2/fips186-2-change1.pdf=0A=0A[FIPS-197] National Institute of Stan= dards and Technology. Advanced=0AEncryption Standard (AES), FIPS PUB 197, N= ovember 2001. =0Ahttp://csrc.nist.gov/publications/fips/fips197/fips-197.pd= f=0A=0A[SP-800-56] E. Barker, D. Johnson, and M. Smid, NIST Special=0APubli= cation 800-56A, Recommendation for Pair-Wise Key Establishment=0ASchemes Us= ing Discrete Logarithm Cryptography. March 2006.=0Ahttp://csrc.nist.gov/pub= lications/nistpubs/800-56A/sp800-56A=5FMay-3-06.pdf=0A=0A[SP-800-67] W. C. = Barker, NIST Special Publication 800-67,=0ARecommendation for Triple Data E= ncryption Algorithm (TDEA) Block=0ACipher. May 2004.=0Ahttp://csrc.nist.gov= /publications/nistpubs/800-67/SP800-67.pdf=0A=0A[HOF] P. Hoffman and H. Orm= an, Determining strengths for public keys=0Aused for exchanging symmetric k= eys, Internet-draft. August 2000.=0A=0A[LEN] A. Lenstra and E. Verhuel, Sel= ecting cryptographic key sizes.=0ASee: http://www.cryptosavvy.com.=0A=0A[JM= S] M. Jacobson, A. Menezes and A. Stein, Solving Elliptic Curve=0ADiscrete = Logarithm Problems Using Weil Descent, Combinatorics and=0AOptimization Res= earch Report 2001-31, May 2001. See:=0Ahttp://www.cacr.math.uwaterloo.ca/.= =0A=0A[SEC2] Standards for Efficient Cryptography Group. SEC 2 - Recommende= d=0AElliptic Curve Domain Parameters. Ver. 1.0., 2000. See:=0Ahttp://www.= secg.org=0A=0A[SOL] J. Solinas, An improved algorithm for arithmetic on a f= amily of=0Aelliptic curves, Proceedings of Crypto '97, Pages 357-371,=0ASpr= inger-Verlag, 1997.=0A=0A[WEIL] Gaudry, P., Hess, F., Smart, Nigel P. Const= ructive and=0ADestructive Facets of Weil Descent on Elliptic Curves, HP Lab= s=0ATechnical Report No. HPL-2000-10, 2000. See:=0Ahttp://www.hpl.hp.com/te= chreports/2000/HPL-2000-10.html=0A=0ABrown = [Page 21]=0A=0C=0AINTERNET-DRAFT Additional ECC G= roups for IKE and IKEv2 January 2006=0A=0A[X9.62] American National Stand= ards Institute, ANS X9.62-2005: Public=0AKey Cryptography for the Financial= Services Industry: The Elliptic=0ACurve Digital Signature Algorithm. Nove= mber 2005.=0A=0A[X9.63] American National Standards Institute. ANSI X9.63-2= 001, Public=0AKey Cryptography for the Financial Services Industry: Key Agr= eement=0Aand Key Transport using Elliptic Curve Cryptography. November 200= 1.=0A=0A9. Author's Addresses=0A=0ADaniel R. L. Brown=0ACerticom Corp.=0A55= 20 Explorer Drive, 4th Floor,=0AMississauga, Ontario, L4W 5L1=0ACanada=0Adb= rown@certicom.com =0A=0A10. Full Copyright Statement=0A=0ACopyright (C) T= he Internet Society (2006). This document is=0Asubject to the rights, lice= nses and restrictions contained in BCP=0A78, and except as set forth therei= n, the authors retain all their=0Arights.=0A=0AThis document and the inform= ation contained herein are provided on=0Aan "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUT= OR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE=0AREPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE I= NTERNET SOCIETY AND=0ATHE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARR= ANTIES,=0AEXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THA= T=0ATHE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR=0AANY= IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A=0APARTICULAR PURPOS= E.=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0ABrown = [Page 22]=0A= --=_mixed 005ABA1285257375_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec --=_mixed 005ABA1285257375_=-- From ceesalt@etwcorp.com Mon Oct 15 13:24:41 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhTgH-0002n5-8g for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 13:24:41 -0400 Received: from [201.240.78.87] (helo=client-201.240.78.87.speedy.net.pe) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhTgD-0002c5-Lr for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 13:24:41 -0400 Received: from ochtp ([187.166.66.64]) by client-201.240.78.87.speedy.net.pe (8.13.3/8.13.3) with SMTP id l9EMRojB028082; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 00:27:50 +0200 Message-ID: <471296C3.6030504@etwcorp.com> Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 00:22:59 +0200 From: User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Whatever you do, make sure you read this! Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 3.0 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Huge Expansion Turning Heads. PHYSICAL PROPERTY (P P Y H) Current: $ 0.25 PPYH announced Thursday that it is targeting the Vision City Facility as its next Acquisition. News is getting out on this company and we are expecting huge investor's response. Give your broker a call, and tell him to move on PPYH. From Scanlon@aoltoronto.com Mon Oct 15 15:18:35 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhVSV-0006sh-Do for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 15:18:35 -0400 Received: from host221-26-dynamic.57-82-r.retail.telecomitalia.it ([82.57.26.221]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhVSR-00036Y-6L for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 15:18:31 -0400 Received: from scalia-c283c913 by aoltoronto.com with ASMTP id ADB74CE4 for ; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 21:18:45 +0200 Received: from scalia-c283c913 ([176.122.199.133]) by aoltoronto.com with ESMTP id B7392B2D1099 for ; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 21:18:45 +0200 Message-ID: <000701c80f60$2dd32af0$dd1a3952@scaliac283c913> From: "Kornelia Scanlon" To: Subject: lleggus Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 21:18:34 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0009_01C80F70.F15BFAF0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 000781-1, 14/10/2007), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Score: 2.1 (++) X-Scan-Signature: b19722fc8d3865b147c75ae2495625f2 ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C80F70.F15BFAF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi ya ipsec-archive be a baller and take home all the hoes http://www.famolink.com/ Kornelia Scanlon ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C80F70.F15BFAF0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi ya ipsec-archive
be a baller and take home all the = hoes
http://www.famolink.com/
Kornelia Scanlon
------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C80F70.F15BFAF0-- From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Mon Oct 15 17:46:37 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhXhD-0007JB-0s; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:41:55 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IhXhA-0007EQ-PL for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:41:52 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhXh9-0007EB-UU for ipsec@ietf.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:41:51 -0400 Received: from sj-iport-3-in.cisco.com ([171.71.176.72] helo=sj-iport-3.cisco.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhXh8-0005xk-CJ for ipsec@ietf.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:41:51 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.21,278,1188802800"; d="scan'208,217";a="535641470" Received: from sj-dkim-1.cisco.com ([171.71.179.21]) by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 15 Oct 2007 14:41:40 -0700 Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com (sj-core-5.cisco.com [171.71.177.238]) by sj-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l9FLfdrT008730; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 14:41:39 -0700 Received: from sfluhrerwxp (stealth-10-32-244-83.cisco.com [10.32.244.83]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id l9FLfRsZ020722; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 21:41:28 GMT From: "Scott Fluhrer" To: "'Daniel Brown'" , References: <47137114.1040906@certicom.com> Subject: RE: [IPsec] Re: Last call comments for draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:41:27 -0400 Message-ID: <008f01c80f74$2b230f00$53f4200a@amer.cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 Thread-Index: AcgPSrZESig41zbmRcaLnV5BoyVeswAHqlyA DKIM-Signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=11706; t=1192484499; x=1193348499; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim1004; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=sfluhrer@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Scott=20Fluhrer=22=20 |Subject:=20RE=3A=20[IPsec]=20Re=3A=20Last=20call=20comments=20for=20draf t-lepinski-dh-groups-01 |Sender:=20; bh=rdEK9MC4IKgqx7zBds/ykx7WiRSD5uphhefQnQdEUVs=; b=srVkgOlrPH4t2KghTxSrxXCrXoL4OWetqkP5FGQV+RZE24n73dKf+3s80m0r/tkLmD5mgGeq xosexM+KRJl+37uDkyJAuhkO6E+PYiDLtWmA4/g/oppeU+0BSHBMLr51459+cpLzcg5JwDaBLV lCLHxeaEr5n3cdlME6XZWCrfA=; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-1; header.From=sfluhrer@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim1004 verified; ); X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) X-Scan-Signature: a4cdc653ecdd96665f2aa1c1af034c9e Cc: Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com, kent@bbn.com, mlepinski@bbn.com, paul.hoffman@vpnc.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1873656822==" Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============1873656822== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0090_01C80F52.A4116F00" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0090_01C80F52.A4116F00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit _____ From: Daniel Brown [mailto:DBrown@certicom.com] Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 12:31 PM To: ipsec@ietf.org Cc: Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com; kent@bbn.com; mlepinski@bbn.com; paul.hoffman@vpnc.org Subject: Re: [IPsec] Re: Last call comments for draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 Hi, Attached is the draft I prepared a while back in an attempt to address Working Last Call comments. As Chinh states, one of the goals of this draft is to allow both the 4753 approach, and the older approach (i.e. ANSI/IEEE/SECG point representation and NIST/ANSI/IEEE/SECG key derivation), in such a way that the approach is determined independently of the group. Comments are welcome on whether this is worthwhile goal, and if so, better ways to attain this goal. The only complaint I have about this approach is that it appears to mandate Certicom IPR for any implementation of the draft. As the previous definition of groups 19-21 in RFC4753 did not mandate this IPR, I don't know if this is an improvement. Background: Certicom claims IPR on the technique of "point compression", which is the method of representing an EC point by giving the entire X coordinate, along with a single bit which represents which of the two possible Y coordinates is meant. Now, the draft does not mandate that you use point compression when forming a KE payload, however, for interoperability purposes an implementation would appear to be required to understand a point-compressed KE payload, and this would appear to be sufficient for infringement. In contrast, RFC4753 places the entire X and Y coordinates in the KE payload, thus avoiding this IPR. My suggestion would be to leave groups 19-21 outside the scope of this draft, and leave them as defined by RFC4753. This would mean that we would use different point representation for different EC groups; that would appear to me to be a lesser evil. Best regards, Dan Brown (905) 501-3857 http://www.certicom.com Chinh Nguyen wrote on 10/15/2007 09:54:28 AM: > Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com wrote: > > Paul Hoffman wrote: > > > >>> 2) For IKEv1/IKEv2, the document should explicitly specify how > >>> ECC points are converted to octet strings (for KE payloads > >>> and resulting shared secret value). Currently, there are at > >>> least three incompatible options (RFC 4753, RFC 2409, and > >>> draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups-10 drafts). I'd suggest just > >>> saying "the same way as in RFC 4753". > >> This bodes really poorly for interoperability. > >> draft-lepinski-dh-groups needs to be revised to specify one of the > >> methods, and that needs to be discussed on the IPsec mailing list. > >> I would not assume that implementers would prefer RFC 4753 over > >> draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups. > > > > I suggested "the same way as in RFC 4753" not because I particularly > > prefer that point-to-octet-string conversion method, but because I > > would prefer not having three different methods (two is bad enough). > > > > (Note that the current ecc-groups-10 draft actually tries to > > modify the definitions of groups 19/20/21 from RFC 4753: it > > reuses the same numbers but with different point-to-octet-string > > conversion method.) > > Note that interoperability issues involve more than the representation > of the ECC point (KE payload in IKE). The shared secret is also > different between RFC 4753 (x + y) and draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups > (x only). This has implications for the generation of the symmetric keys. > > I believe that the representation in draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups is > more widely used including other standards such as SEC, FIPS 186-2, IEEE > 1363, and ANSI X9.62. > > D. Brown at Certicom is writing an update to > draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups which attempts to resolve this > interoperability issue. In a nutshell, both formats are supported. > Practically speaking when it comes to IKE, the responder supports both > format and chooses the format based on the one chosen by the initiator. > > Regards, > > Chinh > > -- > http://www.certicom.com > > > _______________________________________________ > IPsec mailing list > IPsec@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec ------=_NextPart_000_0090_01C80F52.A4116F00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 


From: Daniel Brown=20 [mailto:DBrown@certicom.com]
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 = 12:31=20 PM
To: ipsec@ietf.org
Cc: Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com;=20 kent@bbn.com; mlepinski@bbn.com; = paul.hoffman@vpnc.org
Subject: Re:=20 [IPsec] Re: Last call comments for=20 draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01


Hi,

Attached is the draft I prepared a while back in an attempt = to address=20 Working Last Call comments.

As=20 Chinh states, one of the goals of this draft is to allow both the 4753 = approach, and the older approach (i.e. ANSI/IEEE/SECG point = representation and=20 NIST/ANSI/IEEE/SECG key derivation), in such a way that the approach = is=20 determined independently of the group.

Comments are welcome on whether this is worthwhile goal, and = if so,=20 better ways to attain this goal. 
The only=20 complaint I have about this approach is that it appears to mandate = Certicom IPR=20 for any implementation of the draft.  As the previous definition of = groups=20 19-21 in RFC4753 did not mandate this IPR, I don't know if this is an=20 improvement.
 
Background:=20 Certicom claims IPR on the technique of "point compression", which is = the method=20 of representing an EC point by giving the entire X coordinate, along = with a=20 single bit which represents which of the two possible Y coordinates is=20 meant.  Now, the draft does not mandate that you use point = compression when=20 forming a KE payload, however, for interoperability purposes an = implementation=20 would appear to be required to understand a point-compressed KE payload, = and=20 this would appear to be sufficient for infringement.  In contrast, = RFC4753=20 places the entire X and Y coordinates in the KE payload, thus avoiding = this=20 IPR.
 
My suggestion=20 would be to leave groups 19-21 outside the scope of this draft, and = leave them=20 as defined by RFC4753.  This would mean that we would use different = point=20 representation for different EC groups; that would appear to me to be a = lesser=20 evil.
  =




Best regards,

Dan Brown
(905)=20 501-3857
http://www.certicom.com


Chinh=20 Nguyen <cnguyen@certicom.com> wrote on 10/15/2007 09:54:28=20 AM:

> Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com wrote:
> > Paul Hoffman = wrote:
> >
> >>> 2) For IKEv1/IKEv2, the = document=20 should explicitly specify how
> >>> ECC points are = converted to=20 octet strings (for KE payloads
> >>> and resulting = shared=20 secret value). Currently, there are at
> >>> least = three=20 incompatible options (RFC 4753, RFC 2409, and
> >>>=20 draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups-10 drafts). I'd suggest just
>=20 >>> saying "the same way as in RFC 4753".
> >> = This bodes=20 really poorly for interoperability.
> >> = draft-lepinski-dh-groups=20 needs to be revised to specify one of the
> >> methods, = and that=20 needs to be discussed on the IPsec mailing list.
> >> I = would not=20 assume that implementers would prefer RFC 4753 over
> >>=20 draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups.
> >
> > I = suggested "the=20 same way as in RFC 4753" not because I particularly
> > = prefer that=20 point-to-octet-string conversion method, but because I
> > = would=20 prefer not having three different methods (two is bad enough).
> = >=20
> > (Note that the current ecc-groups-10 draft actually = tries to=20
> > modify the definitions of groups 19/20/21 from RFC 4753: = it
> > reuses the same numbers but with different=20 point-to-octet-string
> > conversion method.)
> =
> Note=20 that interoperability issues involve more than the representation =
> of=20 the ECC point (KE payload in IKE). The shared secret is also
>=20 different between RFC 4753 (x + y) and draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups =
> (x only). This has implications for the generation of the = symmetric=20 keys.
>
> I believe that the representation in=20 draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups is
> more widely used including = other=20 standards such as SEC, FIPS 186-2, IEEE
> 1363, and ANSI = X9.62.
>=20
> D. Brown at Certicom is writing an update to
>=20 draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups which attempts to resolve this =
>=20 interoperability issue. In a nutshell, both formats are supported. =
>=20 Practically speaking when it comes to IKE, the responder supports both =
> format and chooses the format based on the one chosen by the=20 initiator.
>
> Regards,
>
> Chinh
> =
>=20 --
> http://www.certicom.com
>
>
>=20 _______________________________________________
> IPsec mailing=20 list
> IPsec@ietf.org
>=20 = https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec
------=_NextPart_000_0090_01C80F52.A4116F00-- --===============1873656822== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec --===============1873656822==-- From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Mon Oct 15 18:08:45 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhY4J-0005JD-55; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 18:05:47 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IhY4G-0005I3-QM for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 18:05:44 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhY4G-0005Hv-1v for ipsec@ietf.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 18:05:44 -0400 Received: from mail.ca.certicom.com ([38.113.160.197]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhY49-0006xz-R7 for ipsec@ietf.org; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 18:05:44 -0400 Received: from spamfilter.certicom.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.ca.certicom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E9AB10029292; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 18:05:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.ca.certicom.com ([127.0.0.1]) by spamfilter.certicom.com (storm.certicom.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DDOzlp3AijaR; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 18:05:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from domino1.certicom.com (domino1.certicom.com [10.0.1.24]) by mail.ca.certicom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 18:05:22 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <008f01c80f74$2b230f00$53f4200a@amer.cisco.com> To: "Scott Fluhrer" Subject: RE: [IPsec] Re: Last call comments for draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.5 November 30, 2005 Message-ID: From: Daniel Brown Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 18:05:00 -0400 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on Certicom1/Certicom(Release 7.0.2FP2 HF177|August 10, 2007) at 10/15/2007 06:05:14 PM, Serialize complete at 10/15/2007 06:05:14 PM X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 32b73d73e8047ed17386f9799119ce43 Cc: ipsec@ietf.org, Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com, kent@bbn.com, mlepinski@bbn.com, paul.hoffman@vpnc.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1994982498==" Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org This is a multipart message in MIME format. --===============1994982498== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 007951FA85257375_=" This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 007951FA85257375_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" "Scott Fluhrer" wrote on 10/15/2007 05:41:27 PM: > > The only complaint I have about this approach is that it appears to > mandate Certicom IPR for any implementation of the draft. As the > previous definition of groups 19-21 in RFC4753 did not mandate this > IPR, I don't know if this is an improvement. > > Background: Certicom claims IPR on the technique of "point > compression", which is the method of representing an EC point by > giving the entire X coordinate, along with a single bit which > represents which of the two possible Y coordinates is meant. Now, > the draft does not mandate that you use point compression when > forming a KE payload, however, for interoperability purposes an > implementation would appear to be required to understand a point- > compressed KE payload, and this would appear to be sufficient for > infringement. In contrast, RFC4753 places the entire X and Y > coordinates in the KE payload, thus avoiding this IPR. Suppose support of point compression is explicitly defined to only be a MAY. The aim is that parties who really need point compression have specification to comply with, but nobody else will be forced to support it. Similarly, users of point compression will not expect to interoperate with everbody else. Would that alleviate your complaint? Also, keep in mind that this draft is intended for Informational Track. > > My suggestion would be to leave groups 19-21 outside the scope of > this draft, and leave them as defined by RFC4753. This would mean > that we would use different point representation for different EC > groups; that would appear to me to be a lesser evil. > --=_alternative 007951FA85257375_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
"Scott Fluhrer" <sfluhrer@cisco.com> wrote on 10/15/2007 05:41:27 PM:

>  

> The only complaint I have about this approach is that it appears to
> mandate Certicom IPR for any implementation of the draft.  As the
> previous definition of groups 19-21 in RFC4753 did not mandate this
> IPR, I don't know if this is an improvement.

>  
> Background: Certicom claims IPR on the technique of "point
> compression", which is the method of representing an EC point by
> giving the entire X coordinate, along with a single bit which
> represents which of the two possible Y coordinates is meant.  Now,
> the draft does not mandate that you use point compression when
> forming a KE payload, however, for interoperability purposes an
> implementation would appear to be required to understand a point-
> compressed KE payload, and this would appear to be sufficient for
> infringement.  In contrast, RFC4753 places the entire X and Y
> coordinates in the KE payload, thus avoiding this IPR.


Suppose support of point compression is explicitly defined to only be a MAY.    The aim is that parties who really need point compression have specification to comply with, but nobody else will be forced to support it.  Similarly, users of point compression will not expect to interoperate with everbody else.  Would that alleviate your complaint?

Also, keep in mind that this draft is intended for Informational Track.

>  
> My suggestion would be to leave groups 19-21 outside the scope of
> this draft, and leave them as defined by RFC4753.  This would mean
> that we would use different point representation for different EC
> groups; that would appear to me to be a lesser evil.

>  
--=_alternative 007951FA85257375_=-- --===============1994982498== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec --===============1994982498==-- From goksumimacceg@sumimac.net Tue Oct 16 00:37:21 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IheBE-0005II-UG; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 00:37:20 -0400 Received: from [201.240.149.14] (helo=client-201.240.149.14.speedy.net.pe) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IheB8-0002Fh-Vo; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 00:37:16 -0400 Received: from [201.240.149.14] by sumimac.net; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 23:35:54 -0500 Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 23:35:54 -0500 From: "Elijah Washburn" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v2.12.00) Personal Reply-To: goksumimacceg@sumimac.net X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <819291985.21063517280289@sumimac.net> To: 6lowpan@lists.ietf.org Subject: Obesity is dangerous, stop it MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----------FB09B252525250" X-Spam-Score: 3.0 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: bdc523f9a54890b8a30dd6fd53d5d024 ------------FB09B252525250 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Anatrim - The very up-to-date and most exciting product for weighty people is now readily available - As seen on ABC.Do you count up all the cases when you asked yourself to do any thing for being rescued from this fastly growing pounds of fat?Fortunately, now no major price is to be paid.With Anatrim, the ground-shaking pound-melting mixture, you can achieve naturally health life style and become really thinner.Take a look at what people write! "I hate to confess but I was an awful food addict. I swallowed up all this trash and could not stop. This torment stopped when I started course with Anatrim! Oh, God, my craving for food disappeared, spirits increased and I turned to the happiest person 27 pounds in 2.1 months. So, I can tell you now I turned to the happiest person!" Lusia R., San Diego "I had weight problems since I was a boy. You can't imagine how I detested being derided at school. I detested the weight and I abhorred myself. After trying many different remedies I heard about Anatrim. It literally dragged me out of this horror!Many thanks and a great respect to you, guys." Dave Klark, Chicago "Do you know what?Thanks to Anatrim my marriage was luckily saved!I fell down into the circle, depression - eating more - more depression.My wife was about to leave the overweight psycho I was turning in.My best friend showed me web site and I ordered Anatrim at once. The results were great, my appetite came to normal level, I was in a good mood oftener, and, certainly, I went some belt holes back.And you see, the bed became cool also!" Michael There are lots of sincere gratitudes delighted people leave after taking Anatrim.Don't you wanna join the tens of thousands of slender women and men and try this natural appetite decreasing energy increasing product now!Don't decline the chance! http://www.jenaior.net/?weerbglym ------------FB09B252525250 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Anatrim - The very up-to-date and most exciting product for weighty people is now readily available - As seen on ABC.
Do you count up all the cases when you asked yourself to do any thing for being rescued from this fastly growing pounds of fat? Fortunately, now no major price is to be paid. With Anatrim, the ground-shaking pound-melting mixture, you can achieve naturally health life style and become really thinner. Take a look at what people write!

"I hate to confess but I was an awful food addict. I swallowed up all this trash and could not stop. This torment stopped when I started course with Anatrim! Oh, God, my craving for food disappeared, spirits increased and I turned to the happiest person 27 pounds in 2.1 months. So, I can tell you now I turned to the happiest person!"

Lusia R., San Diego

"I had weight problems since I was a boy. You can't imagine how I detested being derided at school. I detested the weight and I abhorred myself. After trying many different remedies I heard about Anatrim. It literally dragged me out of this horror! Many thanks and a great respect to you, guys."

Dave Klark, Chicago

"Do you know what? Thanks to Anatrim my marriage was luckily saved! I fell down into the circle, depression - eating more - more depression. My wife was about to leave the overweight psycho I was turning in. My best friend showed me web site and I ordered Anatrim at once. The results were great, my appetite came to normal level, I was in a good mood oftener, and, certainly, I went some belt holes back. And you see, the bed became cool also!"

Michael

There are lots of sincere gratitudes delighted people leave after taking Anatrim. Don't you wanna join the tens of thousands of slender women and men and try this natural appetite decreasing energy increasing product now!
Don't decline the chance!

http://www.jenaior.net/?weerbglym ------------FB09B252525250-- From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Tue Oct 16 05:07:04 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhiG9-0008OV-An; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 04:58:41 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IhiG7-0008OP-3h for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 04:58:39 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhiG6-0008OH-9J for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 04:58:38 -0400 Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([131.228.20.173] helo=mgw-ext14.nokia.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhiG5-0002bK-EH for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 04:58:38 -0400 Received: from esebh108.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh108.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.143.145]) by mgw-ext14.nokia.com (Switch-3.2.5/Switch-3.2.5) with ESMTP id l9G8vog1025452; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:58:13 +0300 Received: from esebh104.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.143.34]) by esebh108.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:57:37 +0300 Received: from esebe105.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.143.53]) by esebh104.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:57:38 +0300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [IPsec] Re: Last call comments for draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:57:34 +0300 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [IPsec] Re: Last call comments for draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 Thread-Index: AcgPSNfwHgnOGptYRfOKkR5SoGufjQAiKN1g References: <47137114.1040906@certicom.com> From: To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Oct 2007 08:57:38.0301 (UTC) FILETIME=[9A1A1AD0:01C80FD2] X-Nokia-AV: Clean X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 68ba2b07ef271dba6ee42a93832cfa4c Cc: kent@bbn.com, mlepinski@bbn.com, paul.hoffman@vpnc.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org It looks like this proposal creates an interoperability problem:=20 If an implementation of ecc-groups-10-WGLC-0 proposes any of=20 groups 19/20/21, it will not be able to talk to a responder that=20 implements groups 19/20/21 according to RFC 4753 (because the KEi payload will use a different format that RFC 4753-only implementations won't understand). If you insist on including point compression (which RFC 4753 doesn't), IMHO you need to either drop groups 19/20/21 from this document, or=20 redefine them with different numbers. (However, having multiple different formats for the same information=20 is a recipe for interoperability problems, and poorly tested code=20 in implementations -- possibly leading to security problems as well. So I'd really recommend not doing this.) Furthermore, the proposed text is slightly misleading: > "For elliptic curve groups implemented in accordance with this > document, the data in the KE payload when using this group SHOULD be > the octet string representation specified in [SEC1], Section 2.3.3 > (this representation is also specified in [X9.62], [X9.63], > [FIPS-186-2], and [IEEE-1363]) of the point on the curve chosen by > taking the randomly chosen secret Ka and computing Ka*G, where * is > the repetition of the group addition. " This text suggests that [SEC1], [X9.62], [X9.63], [FIPS-186-2], and [IEEE-1363] all specify identical octet string representations for points. This is not the case. I haven't compared all of them, but at least the point-to-octet=20 string conversion specified in [X9.62], Section A.5.7, can produce=20 octet strings that can't be decoded by an implementation doing octet string-to-point conversion according to [SEC1].=20 (Also, the "SHOULD" is probably not the intended word here; it should be either plain "is" or "MUST"). Best regards, Pasi > -----Original Message----- > From: ext Daniel Brown [mailto:DBrown@certicom.com]=20 > Sent: 15 October, 2007 19:31 > To: ipsec@ietf.org > Cc: kent@bbn.com; mlepinski@bbn.com; Eronen Pasi (Nokia-NRC/Helsinki); > paul.hoffman@vpnc.org; Chinh Nguyen > Subject: Re: [IPsec] Re: Last call comments for draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 >=20 > Hi,=20 >=20 > Attached is the draft I prepared a while back in an attempt to > address Working Last Call comments. >=20 > As Chinh states, one of the goals of this draft is to allow both the > 4753 approach, and the older approach (i.e. ANSI/IEEE/SECG point > representation and NIST/ANSI/IEEE/SECG key derivation), in such a > way that the approach is determined independently of the group. > > Comments are welcome on whether this is worthwhile goal, and if so, > better ways to attain this goal. >=20 >=20 > Best regards, >=20 > Dan Brown > (905) 501-3857 > http://www.certicom.com >=20 >=20 > Chinh Nguyen wrote on 10/15/2007 09:54:28 AM: >=20 > > Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com wrote: > > > Paul Hoffman wrote: > > >=20 > > >>> 2) For IKEv1/IKEv2, the document should explicitly specify how > > >>> ECC points are converted to octet strings (for KE payloads > > >>> and resulting shared secret value). Currently, there are at > > >>> least three incompatible options (RFC 4753, RFC 2409, and > > >>> draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups-10 drafts). I'd suggest just > > >>> saying "the same way as in RFC 4753". > > >> This bodes really poorly for interoperability.=20 > > >> draft-lepinski-dh-groups needs to be revised to specify one of the=20 > > >> methods, and that needs to be discussed on the IPsec mailing list.=20 > > >> I would not assume that implementers would prefer RFC 4753 over=20 > > >> draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups. > > >=20 > > > I suggested "the same way as in RFC 4753" not because I particularly > > > prefer that point-to-octet-string conversion method, but because I > > > would prefer not having three different methods (two is bad enough). > > >=20 > > > (Note that the current ecc-groups-10 draft actually tries to=20 > > > modify the definitions of groups 19/20/21 from RFC 4753: it > > > reuses the same numbers but with different point-to-octet-string > > > conversion method.) > >=20 > > Note that interoperability issues involve more than the representation=20 > > of the ECC point (KE payload in IKE). The shared secret is also=20 > > different between RFC 4753 (x + y) and draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups=20 > > (x only). This has implications for the generation of the symmetric keys. > >=20 > > I believe that the representation in draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups is=20 > > more widely used including other standards such as SEC, FIPS 186-2, IEEE=20 > > 1363, and ANSI X9.62. > >=20 > > D. Brown at Certicom is writing an update to=20 > > draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups which attempts to resolve this=20 > > interoperability issue. In a nutshell, both formats are supported.=20 > > Practically speaking when it comes to IKE, the responder supports both=20 > > format and chooses the format based on the one chosen by the initiator. > >=20 > > Regards, > >=20 > > Chinh > >=20 > > -- > > http://www.certicom.com >=20 _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From emilitary@usol.com Tue Oct 16 07:06:44 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhkG4-0003oX-3c; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 07:06:44 -0400 Received: from umpoz-inet1.um.poznan.pl ([150.254.212.161]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhkG1-0006Tr-LH; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 07:06:41 -0400 Received: (qmail 6152 invoked from network); Tue, 16 Oct 2007 13:02:44 +0200 Received: from unknown (HELO plwrm2641566) (emilitary@usol.com@195.166.26.91) by a1d4fe96usol.com with SMTP; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 13:02:44 +0200 Message-ID: <001401c80ff4$d7d1b1e0$065ebfbc@plwrm2641566> From: lunch or To: imapext-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: xetiquette Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 13:02:44 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0011_01C80FF4.D7D1B1E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.4682 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2720.3000 X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 21c69d3cfc2dd19218717dbe1d974352 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C80FF4.D7D1B1E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In addition to painting, photography or sculpture, media such as we could, = therefor charging a much lower price. This is where the with a medium very similar to acrylic painting. On a TV monitor ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C80FF4.D7D1B1E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

able to remain in one central location and complete all daily
=

Are you wanting a bigger p_ e >n _is?

As se _e -n on T _V

Over 733,000 Men around the world are already satisfied
Gain 4+ Inches In Leng _th
Increase Your P _en -is Wi _dth (Girth) By up _to 27%
100% Safe To Take, With NO Side Effects
No Pum _ps! No Su _rgery! No Exercises!
*3 F _RE >E Bottles

View, Then And Now Pics

cultural gate keepers. Since most establishment galleries have a
= ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01C80FF4.D7D1B1E0-- From rteacher@intlnetwork.com Tue Oct 16 07:11:27 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhkKd-0007tz-Aa; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 07:11:27 -0400 Received: from host-89-228-219-30.kalisz.mm.pl ([89.228.219.30] helo=intlnetwork.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhkKR-0006ny-TM; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 07:11:22 -0400 Received: (qmail 411 invoked from network); Tue, 16 Oct 2007 13:11:12 +0200 Received: from unknown (HELO xxxecd9d17bc33) (rteacher@intlnetwork.com@71.158.123.191) by 1edbe459intlnetwork.com with SMTP; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 13:11:12 +0200 Message-ID: <001301c80ff6$0699e6e0$07815814@xxxecd9d17bc33> From: Ernesto Pruitt To: imapext-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: on tribal Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 13:11:12 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0010_01C80FF6.0699E6E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2462.1081 X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2462.2969 X-Spam-Score: 3.3 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 9ed51c9d1356100bce94f1ae4ec616a9 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C80FF6.0699E6E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable actually study that kind of stuff at school? I heard all this see a three d= imensional object from all directions while it moves to computers - to the bright colors, movement and sound emote ------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C80FF6.0699E6E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

impact in the home than any other techno convenience since the

Are you wanting a bigger p_ e >n _is?

As se _e -n on T _V

Over 752,000 Men around the world are already satisfied
Gain 3+ Inches In Leng _th
Increase Your P _en -is Wi _dth (Girth) By up _to 29%
100% Safe To Take, With NO Side Effects
No Pum _ps! No Su _rgery! No Exercises!
*3 F _RE >E Bottles

View, Then And Now Pics

communications in a different way - an area of communications
------=_NextPart_000_0010_01C80FF6.0699E6E0-- From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Tue Oct 16 11:42:04 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhoSu-0004J5-8Z; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:36:16 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IhoSs-0004Ip-Jd for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:36:14 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhoSr-0004If-PR for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:36:13 -0400 Received: from mail.ca.certicom.com ([38.113.160.197]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhoSl-0000WM-JN for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:36:13 -0400 Received: from spamfilter.certicom.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.ca.certicom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A9C31006B072; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:35:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.ca.certicom.com ([127.0.0.1]) by spamfilter.certicom.com (storm.certicom.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RoT7Vj9QpcFq; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:35:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from domino1.certicom.com (domino1.certicom.com [10.0.1.24]) by mail.ca.certicom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:35:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [10.24.0.102] ([10.24.0.102]) by domino1.certicom.com (Lotus Domino Release 7.0.2FP2 HF177) with ESMTP id 2007101611354123-98706 ; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:35:41 -0400 Message-ID: <4714DABE.3020404@certicom.com> Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 11:37:34 -0400 From: Chinh Nguyen User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com Subject: Re: [IPsec] Re: Last call comments for draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 References: <47137114.1040906@certicom.com> In-Reply-To: X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on Certicom1/Certicom(Release 7.0.2FP2 HF177|August 10, 2007) at 10/16/2007 11:35:41 AM, Serialize by Router on Certicom1/Certicom(Release 7.0.2FP2 HF177|August 10, 2007) at 10/16/2007 11:35:42 AM, Serialize complete at 10/16/2007 11:35:42 AM Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 4adaf050708fb13be3316a9eee889caa Cc: DBrown@certicom.com, ipsec@ietf.org, kent@bbn.com, mlepinski@bbn.com, paul.hoffman@vpnc.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com wrote: > It looks like this proposal creates an interoperability problem: > If an implementation of ecc-groups-10-WGLC-0 proposes any of > groups 19/20/21, it will not be able to talk to a responder that > implements groups 19/20/21 according to RFC 4753 (because the > KEi payload will use a different format that RFC 4753-only > implementations won't understand). With regards to our IKE implementation, we default to RFC 4753 for groups 19/20/21 as initiator and use the other format for the other curves. Perhaps it should explicitly state this fact ("MUST"?) in ecc-groups-10-WGLC-0. > If you insist on including point compression (which RFC 4753 doesn't), > IMHO you need to either drop groups 19/20/21 from this document, or > redefine them with different numbers. My reading of the draft is that the proposed point-to-octet string format must be supported but not necessarily point compression itself. Namely, an implementation may choose to support only 04|X|Y. Again, perhaps an explicit statement? > I haven't compared all of them, but at least the point-to-octet > string conversion specified in [X9.62], Section A.5.7, can produce > octet strings that can't be decoded by an implementation doing > octet string-to-point conversion according to [SEC1]. I assume you are referring to hybrid form (06|07) as specified in X9.62? Formally, this is an incompatibility SEC1 and X9.62. But conversion from hybrid format to uncompressed/compressed format is easy. As I noted in a previous e-mail, (non)-interoperability extends to the shared secret. In the other standards, as well as the current draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01, the shared secret is the x-coordinate. This is not the case with RFC 4753 which includes both x and y. Compare the shared-secret of the 256-bit curve in draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 page 21 and rfc 4753 page 9. draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 should also describe the format of the shared secret. Chinh -- http://www.certicom.com _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From meksusangardnerfuj@susangardner.com Tue Oct 16 12:13:56 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ihp3L-0006Lt-UR; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 12:13:55 -0400 Received: from 200-103-119-161.bsace705.dsl.brasiltelecom.net.br ([200.103.119.161] helo=SpeedTouch.lan) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ihp3H-0001vG-K3; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 12:13:53 -0400 Received: from [200.103.119.161] by mail-incoming.gate.com; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 13:14:17 -0300 Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 13:14:17 -0300 From: "Kendra Dahl" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v2.10.03) Personal Reply-To: meksusangardnerfuj@susangardner.com X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <444833567.24555145962988@susangardner.com> To: 6lowpan@lists.ietf.org Subject: Legal software sales MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----------C8409DAAAAA379DA" X-Spam-Score: 4.9 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 4d87d2aa806f79fed918a62e834505ca ------------C8409DAAAAA379DA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Our main purpose is to render low cost PC and Mac lawful software and computer solutions for any budget. Whether you are a corporate customer, a small business possessor, or shopping for your own PC, we guess that we'll assist you. VIEW WHAT WE GOT TO PROPOSE http://scsytnu.softoemforu.net/ Most demanding materials in sight: *Adobe Atmosphere 1.0: Retail price this day - $399.00; Our this time just - $29.95 *Microsoft Windows 2003 Enterprise Server: Retail price now - $800.00; Our for this day just - $69.95 *Adobe Photoshop Elements V 2.0: Retail price for this day - $99.00; Our only - $19.95 *Symantec WinFax Pro V 10.03: Retail price for this time - $100.00; Our for this time only - $19.95 *Macromedia Studio 8: Retail price for now - $999.00; Our just - $99.95 *Adobe Acrobat 8.0 Professional for Mac: Retail price for this day - $449.00; Our only - $79.95 *Corel Painter IX for Mac: Retail price now - $429.00; Our only for this time - $39.95 *Macromedia Fontographer 4: Retail price for this time - $105.95; Our just for now - $19.95 COME TO US! http://scsytnu.softoemforu.net/ ------------C8409DAAAAA379DA Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Our main purpose is to render low cost PC and Mac lawful software and computer solutions for any budget.
Whether you are a corporate customer, a small business possessor,
or shopping for your own PC, we guess that we'll assist you.
VIEW WHAT WE GOT TO PROPOSE

http://scsytnu.softoemforu.net/
Most demanding materials in sight:
*Adobe Atmosphere 1.0: Retail price this day - $399.00; Our this time just - $29.95
*Microsoft Windows 2003 Enterprise Server: Retail price now - $800.00; Our for this day just - $69.95
*Adobe Photoshop Elements V 2.0: Retail price for this day - $99.00; Our only - $19.95
*Symantec WinFax Pro V 10.03: Retail price for this time - $100.00; Our for this time only - $19.95
*Macromedia Studio 8: Retail price for now - $999.00; Our just - $99.95
*Adobe Acrobat 8.0 Professional for Mac: Retail price for this day - $449.00; Our only - $79.95
*Corel Painter IX for Mac: Retail price now - $429.00; Our only for this time - $39.95
*Macromedia Fontographer 4: Retail price for this time - $105.95; Our just for now - $19.95
COME TO US!
http://scsytnu.softoemforu.net/ ------------C8409DAAAAA379DA-- From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Tue Oct 16 15:51:02 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhsMf-0002if-TF; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:46:05 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IhsMe-0002fx-9K for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:46:04 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhsMd-0002fA-Ax for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:46:03 -0400 Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com ([171.71.176.117]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IhsMc-0003Pg-P9 for ipsec@ietf.org; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:46:03 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.21,284,1188802800"; d="scan'208";a="238083813" Received: from sj-dkim-3.cisco.com ([171.71.179.195]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 16 Oct 2007 12:46:02 -0700 Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com (sj-core-5.cisco.com [171.71.177.238]) by sj-dkim-3.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id l9GJk2kb002709; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 12:46:02 -0700 Received: from sfluhrerwxp (stealth-10-32-244-83.cisco.com [10.32.244.83]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id l9GJjPsZ021670; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 19:45:36 GMT From: "Scott Fluhrer" To: "'Chinh Nguyen'" , References: <47137114.1040906@certicom.com> <4714DABE.3020404@certicom.com> Subject: RE: [IPsec] Re: Last call comments for draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:45:24 -0400 Message-ID: <013301c8102d$2e14ffc0$53f4200a@amer.cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <4714DABE.3020404@certicom.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3138 Thread-Index: AcgQDLalqoAypxEIQP+0rFOX9yxp7gAEy7/g DKIM-Signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=3449; t=1192563962; x=1193427962; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim3002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=sfluhrer@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Scott=20Fluhrer=22=20 |Subject:=20RE=3A=20[IPsec]=20Re=3A=20Last=20call=20comments=20for=20draf t-lepinski-dh-groups-01 |Sender:=20; bh=qNhPIxHTFMfmQHJu7V+4AeBTgjHMtYmbXK72e5YxW6M=; b=d/eRUbIRtiXjBwRxfTnYPK4f4MmzgmaxrCZfnplnMRTt6JFzxla33uv89r788qxlkWhmS4Kp 5za5f2p7lPnt8iHVQQtI3vAI5Q8CjK3LWj56TB4/MMPPUlEX79aJ9mbh; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-3; header.From=sfluhrer@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim3002 verified; ); X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 10ba05e7e8a9aa6adb025f426bef3a30 Cc: DBrown@certicom.com, ipsec@ietf.org, kent@bbn.com, mlepinski@bbn.com, paul.hoffman@vpnc.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org > -----Original Message----- > From: Chinh Nguyen [mailto:cnguyen@certicom.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 11:38 AM > To: Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com > Cc: DBrown@certicom.com; ipsec@ietf.org; kent@bbn.com; > mlepinski@bbn.com; paul.hoffman@vpnc.org > Subject: Re: [IPsec] Re: Last call comments for > draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 > > Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com wrote: > > It looks like this proposal creates an interoperability problem: > > If an implementation of ecc-groups-10-WGLC-0 proposes any of groups > > 19/20/21, it will not be able to talk to a responder that > implements > > groups 19/20/21 according to RFC 4753 (because the KEi payload will > > use a different format that RFC 4753-only implementations won't > > understand). > > With regards to our IKE implementation, we default to RFC > 4753 for groups 19/20/21 as initiator and use the other > format for the other curves. > > Perhaps it should explicitly state this fact ("MUST"?) in > ecc-groups-10-WGLC-0. That, at least to me, would seems to be reasonable. > > > If you insist on including point compression (which RFC > 4753 doesn't), > > IMHO you need to either drop groups 19/20/21 from this document, or > > redefine them with different numbers. > > My reading of the draft is that the proposed point-to-octet > string format must be supported but not necessarily point > compression itself. > Namely, an implementation may choose to support only 04|X|Y. > > Again, perhaps an explicit statement? Again, in that case, we can have a situation where two different implementations support the same groups, but can't interoperate (because one side insists on using the 02|X format, and the other side doesn't implement it). I'm not sure if that's a situation that the IETF would want to encourage; can others comment? Now, there may be ways around that (for example, if you receive a 02|X or 03|X format, pick one of the two possible Ys arbitrarily; you can try to claim that you're just using Miller's 1986 observation that transmitting only the X coordinate is sufficient in this case). However, I am not a lawyer, and I'm not sure if this would be considered a valid way to avoid the IPR. > > > I haven't compared all of them, but at least the > point-to-octet string > > conversion specified in [X9.62], Section A.5.7, can produce octet > > strings that can't be decoded by an implementation doing octet > > string-to-point conversion according to [SEC1]. > > I assume you are referring to hybrid form (06|07) as > specified in X9.62? > Formally, this is an incompatibility SEC1 and X9.62. But > conversion from hybrid format to uncompressed/compressed > format is easy. > > As I noted in a previous e-mail, (non)-interoperability > extends to the shared secret. In the other standards, as well > as the current draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01, the shared secret > is the x-coordinate. This is not the case with RFC 4753 which > includes both x and y. Compare the shared-secret of the > 256-bit curve in draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 page > 21 and rfc 4753 page 9. > > draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 should also describe the format > of the shared secret. > > Chinh > -- > http://www.certicom.com > > > _______________________________________________ > IPsec mailing list > IPsec@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec > _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From Novellinipzr@alfert.org Wed Oct 17 07:26:56 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ii73A-0001kq-1z for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 07:26:56 -0400 Received: from host175-39-static.4-79-b.business.telecomitalia.it ([79.4.39.175]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ii738-0000gH-VQ for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 07:26:55 -0400 Received: from your-a47779be2c ([137.147.37.174]:19213 "EHLO your-a47779be2c" smtp-auth: TLS-CIPHER: TLS-PEER-CN1: ) by host175-39-static.4-79-b.business.telecomitalia.it with ESMTP id S22BHMFJBQKGDVZV (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Oct 2007 13:27:48 +0200 Message-ID: <000b01c810b0$a9dc8870$af27044f@youra47779be2c> From: "Xiangyu Novellini" To: Subject: emonte's Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 13:27:13 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0006_01C810C1.6D655870" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 97adf591118a232206bdb5a27b217034 ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C810C1.6D655870 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable hey darling ipsec-archive she loves it when i squirt cum all over her face now http://www.haienews.com/ Xiangyu Novellini ------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C810C1.6D655870 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
hey darling ipsec-archive
she loves it when i squirt cum all over her = face=20 now
http://www.haienews.com/
Xiangyu Novellini
------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C810C1.6D655870-- From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 17 08:31:37 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ii7xX-0001tT-UP; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 08:25:11 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Ii7xW-0001rk-PS for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 08:25:10 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ii7xV-0001pb-Uo for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 08:25:09 -0400 Received: from fireball.acr.fi ([83.145.195.1] helo=mail.kivinen.iki.fi) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ii7xV-0003F5-6y for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 08:25:09 -0400 Received: from fireball.kivinen.iki.fi (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.kivinen.iki.fi (8.13.8/8.12.10) with ESMTP id l9HCOdA3007565 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 17 Oct 2007 15:24:39 +0300 (EEST) Received: (from kivinen@localhost) by fireball.kivinen.iki.fi (8.13.8/8.12.11) id l9HCOYtE023326; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 15:24:34 +0300 (EEST) X-Authentication-Warning: fireball.kivinen.iki.fi: kivinen set sender to kivinen@iki.fi using -f MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <18197.65282.740214.291883@fireball.kivinen.iki.fi> Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 15:24:34 +0300 From: Tero Kivinen To: "Scott Fluhrer" Subject: RE: [IPsec] Re: Last call comments for draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 In-Reply-To: <013301c8102d$2e14ffc0$53f4200a@amer.cisco.com> References: <47137114.1040906@certicom.com> <4714DABE.3020404@certicom.com> <013301c8102d$2e14ffc0$53f4200a@amer.cisco.com> X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under Emacs 21.4.1 X-Edit-Time: 30 min X-Total-Time: 37 min X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 244a2fd369eaf00ce6820a760a3de2e8 Cc: kent@bbn.com, mlepinski@bbn.com, DBrown@certicom.com, Pasi.Eronen@nokia.com, paul.hoffman@vpnc.org, ipsec@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Scott Fluhrer writes: > > With regards to our IKE implementation, we default to RFC > > 4753 for groups 19/20/21 as initiator and use the other > > format for the other curves. > > > > Perhaps it should explicitly state this fact ("MUST"?) in > > ecc-groups-10-WGLC-0. > > That, at least to me, would seems to be reasonable. As we do have one specified way how to format for the KE and shared secrets defined as RFC (RFC4753), I see no point of using any other format now. I think the draft-ietf-ipsec-ike-ecc-groups-10.txt should be fixed to use the same format too, and not to define new formats. If we want to add support for point compression, I see that only way to do that is to add duplicate numbers for those elliptic curves one with point compression and another without. We cannot really negotiate the support for point compression as KE payload is already used in the first packet we send from initiator to the responder. With separate group numbers we could get interoperability by using INVALID_KE_PAYLOAD notification with one extra round trip. On the other hand if I have understood correctly the benefit from point compression is saving less than 64 bytes from the final payload. The first packet is 28 bytes of header + 44 bytes of SA payload (one exact alogorithm set) + 8 (KE payload header len) + KE payload len + 36 (32 byte nonce payload) + 2 * 28 (2 * NAT detection payloads) = 172 bytes + KE data length. I.e using 512 bit elliptic curve that makes the first packet 300 bytes without point compressioon and 236 bytes with point compression. Both will still keep the packet length way below the threshold that would start causing fragmentation and so on. Bandwidth saving concerns for packets which are sent once for every 8 hours or so is not really meaningful. > > As I noted in a previous e-mail, (non)-interoperability > > extends to the shared secret. In the other standards, as well > > as the current draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01, the shared secret > > is the x-coordinate. This is not the case with RFC 4753 which > > includes both x and y. Compare the shared-secret of the > > 256-bit curve in draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 page > > 21 and rfc 4753 page 9. > > > > draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01 should also describe the format > > of the shared secret. The current text in draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01.txt says you use formatting specified in the RFC2409. It does not really say anything about IKEv2. RFC4306 does not specify how to use it with elliptic curves. RFC2409 says we only send and use x (no mention of padding, and only has EC2N groups). RFC4753 says we use both x and y (padded and concatenated, and only has ECP groups). Draft-lepinski-dh-groups-01.txt should be updated to refer to RFC4753 for IKEv2 case and use that formatting specified there. The test vectors should be provided in format where both x and y of the secret is given (even if some protocols referenced there do use only x of it). There is no need to have exact payload encodings as is done in RFC4753 as this draft defines groups for other use than IKEv2 too, but it would be useful to have both girx and giry and perhaps g^ir too (using RFC4753 terminology to refer those values here). -- kivinen@safenet-inc.com _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From xaztaylorardendij@taylorarden.net Wed Oct 17 09:52:13 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ii9Jl-0006QH-Eo; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 09:52:13 -0400 Received: from [201.78.235.169] (helo=20178235169.user.veloxzone.com.br) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ii9Jg-0005gS-Ri; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 09:52:11 -0400 Received: from [201.78.235.169] by mail.taylorarden.net; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:52:37 -0300 Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:52:37 -0300 From: "Danial Woodson" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v2.12.00) Educational Reply-To: xaztaylorardendij@taylorarden.net X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <122821812.64726464235532@taylorarden.net> To: 6lowpan@lists.ietf.org Subject: Can you imagine that you are healthy? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----------F0CAB48D3F05E29" X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 52e1467c2184c31006318542db5614d5 ------------F0CAB48D3F05E29 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit LegalRX chemist's propose all pharmas that you need to restore your health at little cost. We work through the whole planet with clients from America, Europe and Asia. This time you got no need to look for drug-shop at your region. We certainly transfer high quality pillsworld-wide. Visit our site to acquire cures you require immediately straight to your residence. http://herethe.cn/ We're ratified by VeriSign & VISA consequently we provide secure & trustworthy buying. ------------F0CAB48D3F05E29 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit LegalRX chemist's propose all pharmas that you need to restore your health at little cost.
We work through the whole planet with clients from America, Europe and Asia.
This time you got no need to look for drug-shop at your region.
We certainly transfer high quality pillsworld-wide.

Visit our site to acquire cures you require immediately straight to your residence.

http://herethe.cn/
We're ratified by VeriSign & VISA consequently we provide secure & trustworthy buying. ------------F0CAB48D3F05E29-- From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 17 10:11:25 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ii9Y1-0004KP-7K; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:06:57 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Ii6El-0001Xe-UA for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 06:34:51 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ii6El-0001U5-01 for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 06:34:51 -0400 Received: from kuber.nabble.com ([216.139.236.158]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ii6Ee-0006KI-Re for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 06:34:50 -0400 Received: from isper.nabble.com ([192.168.236.156]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Ii6ET-0005uC-AJ for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 03:34:33 -0700 Message-ID: <13250809.post@talk.nabble.com> Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 03:34:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Vaibhav agarwal To: ipsec@ietf.org Subject: [Ipsec] Can racoon initiate IKE negotiation only for one IP MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Nabble-From: vaibhav.agarwal@aricent.com X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 41c17b4b16d1eedaa8395c26e9a251c4 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:06:55 -0400 X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Hi, I have one network interface with two IP, the first one is 10.118.213.113(eth0) and the other is 10.118.213.104 (eth1) At the moment, I want to setup one IPSec tunnels with the remote machine:10.118.213.69(eth0). But when I use local machine to trigger the IKE negotiation, racoon uses 10.118.213.113 and 10.118.213.104 both as the source IP such that tunnel is establish b/w both the IP 10.118.213.113 & 10.118.213.69 and 10.118.213.104 & 10.118.213.69. But I want a tunnel only b/w one IP 10.118.213.113 & 10.118.213.69. and I want 10.118.213.104 IP ping from any machine (I want no tunnel created with the 10.118.213.104 IP). My setkey.conf file:- # Flush the SAD and SPD flush; spdflush; # Create policies for racoon spdadd 10.118.213.69/24 10.118.213.113/24 any -P in ipsec esp/tunnel/10.118.213.69-10.118.213.113/require; spdadd 10.118.213.113/24 10.118.213.69/24 any -P out ipsec esp/tunnel/10.118.213.113-10.118.213.69/require; My racoon.conf file :- path include "/etc/racoon"; #path pre_shared_key "/etc/racoon/psk.txt"; path certificate "/etc/racoon/certs"; remote 10.118.213.69 { exchange_mode main; lifetime time 24hour; certificate_type x509 "rncpet113_cert.pem" "rncpet113_key.pem"; verify_cert off; my_identifier asn1dn; peers_identifier asn1dn; proposal { encryption_algorithm 3des; hash_algorithm md5; authentication_method rsasig; dh_group 2; } } sainfo address 10.118.213.113/24 any address 10.118.213.69/24 any { pfs_group 2; lifetime time 24 hour ; encryption_algorithm 3des ; authentication_algorithm hmac_md5 ; compression_algorithm deflate ; } Can anyone help me ? Vaibhav -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Can-racoon-initiate-IKE-negotiation-only-for-one-IP-tf4639459.html#a13250809 Sent from the IETF - Ipsec mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 17 10:11:30 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ii9Y1-0004La-QG; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:06:57 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Ii7lb-0004Rx-95 for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 08:12:51 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ii7la-0004Qw-Fb for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 08:12:50 -0400 Received: from kuber.nabble.com ([216.139.236.158]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ii7la-0002rN-3O for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 08:12:50 -0400 Received: from isper.nabble.com ([192.168.236.156]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Ii7lZ-0000ds-NU for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 05:12:49 -0700 Message-ID: <13250809.post@talk.nabble.com> Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 05:12:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Vaibhav agarwal To: ipsec@ietf.org Subject: [Ipsec] Can racoon initiate IKE negotiation only for one IP MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Nabble-From: vaibhav.agarwal@aricent.com X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 41c17b4b16d1eedaa8395c26e9a251c4 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:06:55 -0400 X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Hi, I have one network interface with two IP, the first one is 10.118.213.113(eth0) and the other is 10.118.213.104 (eth1) At the moment, I want to setup one IPSec tunnels with the remote machine:10.118.213.69(eth0). But when I use local machine to trigger the IKE negotiation, racoon uses 10.118.213.113 and 10.118.213.104 both as the source IP such that tunnel is establish b/w both the IP 10.118.213.113 & 10.118.213.69 and 10.118.213.104 & 10.118.213.69. But I want a tunnel only b/w one IP 10.118.213.113 & 10.118.213.69. and I want 10.118.213.104 IP ping from any machine (I want no tunnel created with the 10.118.213.104 IP). My setkey.conf file:- # Flush the SAD and SPD flush; spdflush; # Create policies for racoon spdadd 10.118.213.69/24 10.118.213.113/24 any -P in ipsec esp/tunnel/10.118.213.69-10.118.213.113/require; spdadd 10.118.213.113/24 10.118.213.69/24 any -P out ipsec esp/tunnel/10.118.213.113-10.118.213.69/require; My racoon.conf file :- path include "/etc/racoon"; #path pre_shared_key "/etc/racoon/psk.txt"; path certificate "/etc/racoon/certs"; remote 10.118.213.69 { exchange_mode main; lifetime time 24hour; certificate_type x509 "rncpet113_cert.pem" "rncpet113_key.pem"; verify_cert off; my_identifier asn1dn; peers_identifier asn1dn; proposal { encryption_algorithm 3des; hash_algorithm md5; authentication_method rsasig; dh_group 2; } } sainfo address 10.118.213.113/24 any address 10.118.213.69/24 any { pfs_group 2; lifetime time 24 hour ; encryption_algorithm 3des ; authentication_algorithm hmac_md5 ; compression_algorithm deflate ; } Can anyone help me ? Vaibhav -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Can-racoon-initiate-IKE-negotiation-only-for-one-IP-tf4639459.html#a13250809 Sent from the IETF - Ipsec mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 17 10:57:36 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IiAHK-0006lm-08; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:53:46 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IiAHI-0006kU-2i for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:53:44 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IiAHH-0006eY-BT for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:53:43 -0400 Received: from netasq.netasq.com ([213.30.137.178]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IiAHB-0007mE-3m for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:53:38 -0400 Received: from darkstar.netasq.com (unknown [10.0.0.126]) by netasq.netasq.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19C5C45CC3; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 16:53:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: by darkstar.netasq.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id AC206F7531; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 16:42:49 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 16:42:49 +0200 From: VANHULLEBUS Yvan To: Vaibhav agarwal Subject: Re: [Ipsec] Can racoon initiate IKE negotiation only for one IP Message-ID: <20071017144249.GA91056@darkstar.netasq.com> References: <13250809.post@talk.nabble.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <13250809.post@talk.nabble.com> User-Agent: All mail clients suck. This one just sucks less. X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 5ebbf074524e58e662bc8209a6235027 Cc: ipsec@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0049092481==" Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org --===============0049092481== Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; boundary="LQksG6bCIzRHxTLp" Content-Disposition: inline --LQksG6bCIzRHxTLp Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 05:12:49AM -0700, Vaibhav agarwal wrote: >=20 > Hi, Hi. > I have one network interface with two IP, the first > one is 10.118.213.113(eth0) and the other is 10.118.213.104 (eth1) > At the moment, I want to setup one IPSec tunnels with > the remote machine:10.118.213.69(eth0).=20 >=20 > But when I use local machine to trigger the IKE negotiation, > racoon uses 10.118.213.113 and 10.118.213.104 both as the source IP s= uch > that > tunnel is establish b/w both the IP 10.118.213.113 & 10.118.213.69 and > 10.118.213.104 & 10.118.213.69. Strange... [...] >=20 > Can anyone help me ? Have a look at racoon.conf's man page, and add a 'listen' section to your racoon.conf, when you'll only specify the local IP address you want to use. Yvan. --=20 NETASQ http://www.netasq.com --LQksG6bCIzRHxTLp Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIINOgYJKoZIhvcNAQcCoIINKzCCDScCAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMAsGCSqGSIb3DQEHAaCC CoYwggZ8MIIFZKADAgECAgpwxrFIFmvykGpdMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBAUAMIGRMQswCQYDVQQG EwJGUjENMAsGA1UECBMETm9yZDEaMBgGA1UEBxMRVmlsbGVuZXV2ZSBkJ0FzY3ExLjAsBgNV BAoTJU5FVEFTUSAtIFNlY3VyZSBJbnRlcm5ldCBDb25uZWN0aXZpdHkxJzAlBgNVBAsTHk5F VEFTUSBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0aW9uIEF1dGhvcml0eTAeFw0wNzA3MTYwOTU4MDhaFw0wOTA3MTUw OTU4MDhaMIHYMQswCQYDVQQGFAJGUjENMAsGA1UECBQETm9yZDEuMCwGA1UEChQlTkVUQVNR IC0gU2VjdXJlIEludGVybmV0IENvbm5lY3Rpdml0eTEnMCUGA1UECxQeTkVUQVNRIENlcnRp ZmljYXRpb24gQXV0aG9yaXR5MRowGAYDVQQHFBFWaWxsZW5ldXZlIGQnQXNjcTEZMBcGA1UE AxQQeXZhbiBWQU5IVUxMRUJVUzEqMCgGCSqGSIb3DQEJARYbeXZhbi52YW5odWxsZWJ1c0Bu ZXRhc3EuY29tMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEArqZ+vhct7xUvoDOL yI6I/WS8H1qx5M31ECuEzMpO7dNEAeEnjQ0SsmgqJi0IUvlsnHQaOuMhzLMACThad5Z9cA2B tg7d9qk9cOU40BNL3L14qROaoowCKqPG9uNMtCaQM3p5iMnIbud4Z+gvoezjlOSVzLH6Brcp HC1iKAfPb2JI0xqWlvVRT+nOhdG+hEtPSKeGQaniSCcUFRsdyKB20qZVNCXNXskOiJoAohp6 mPopsAEnuitFE+u8ps9Pdly8N+BLMIKGzO5aEg0vxUX2UMN0kBBrLopmIj1ed+NOZKEshiKS 20Bqz24725Uh0Fn/9PftjFiBY6hFiJKU4CQ2QwIDAQABo4ICizCCAocwDAYDVR0TAQH/BAIw ADAdBgNVHQ4EFgQUq8DCXoQV2AIeiRLvzDPubbew5Dgwgb4GA1UdIwSBtjCBs4AUJyrrHdlE 2joXc2oJICDJJaj5f7KhgZekgZQwgZExCzAJBgNVBAYTAkZSMQ0wCwYDVQQIEwROb3JkMRow GAYDVQQHExFWaWxsZW5ldXZlIGQnQXNjcTEuMCwGA1UEChMlTkVUQVNRIC0gU2VjdXJlIElu dGVybmV0IENvbm5lY3Rpdml0eTEnMCUGA1UECxMeTkVUQVNRIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gQXV0 aG9yaXR5ggEAMA4GA1UdDwEB/wQEAwIF4DARBglghkgBhvhCAQEEBAMCBaAwKwYJKwYBBAGC NxQCBB4eHABTAG0AYQByAHQAYwBhAHIAZABMAG8AZwBvAG4wKQYDVR0lBCIwIAYIKwYBBQUH AwQGCCsGAQUFBwMCBgorBgEEAYI3FAICMCsGA1UdEQQkMCKgIAYKKwYBBAGCNxQCA6ASDBB5 dmFudkBuZXRhc3EuY29tMIHNBgNVHR8EgcUwgcIwWqBYoFaGVGxkYXA6Ly9wa2kubmV0YXNx LmNvbS9jbj1md2NhLG91PWNhcyxvPW5ldGFzcSxkYz1mcj9jZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZVJldm9jYXRp b25MaXN0O2JpbmFyeTA4oDagNIYyaHR0cDovL2ludHJhbmV0Lm5ldGFzcS5jb20vaW50cmFu ZXQvcGtpL25ldGFzcS5jcmwwKqAooCaGJGh0dHA6Ly93d3cubmV0YXNxLmNvbS9wa2kvbmV0 YXNxLmNybDAfBglghkgBhvhCAQ0EEhYQVXNlciBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZTANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQQF AAOCAQEAUiSvrad7pGSGQblLF8U9SwjSelyRYicqihVnWKHoHZ3kRYI6QoVRcZlStDegZ+yU CLOoRGF+KCMnZzP7YfxqucdB06i/deP26R7YHK/4vjOSvIyfT2Z/wspPQqYCkqq3BwcbJ4Fz 3KK1mqkxcevTuLSugcaaYC6csbxfVa12UN47+3Cd37ViHU2L1z1GunY5dzCW1CaZEqJ5YvD4 x0ylsCDuxifp7uEw1bc1fXMC3XPO1Nlf6SAVcqn4u+jNL812jwndPg6C6WdUXDwAV6KHzxCA dVH+6AoV5tU2TScdXGCk8/AzwxVKCo9SdwvQut57ko20FFx5xFRJV7F49k/EWjCCBAIwggLq oAMCAQICAQAwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEEBQAwgZExCzAJBgNVBAYTAkZSMQ0wCwYDVQQIEwROb3Jk MRowGAYDVQQHExFWaWxsZW5ldXZlIGQnQXNjcTEuMCwGA1UEChMlTkVUQVNRIC0gU2VjdXJl IEludGVybmV0IENvbm5lY3Rpdml0eTEnMCUGA1UECxMeTkVUQVNRIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24g QXV0aG9yaXR5MB4XDTAyMDIxOTEyMzQ1NVoXDTIyMDIxNDEyMzQ1NVowgZExCzAJBgNVBAYT AkZSMQ0wCwYDVQQIEwROb3JkMRowGAYDVQQHExFWaWxsZW5ldXZlIGQnQXNjcTEuMCwGA1UE ChMlTkVUQVNRIC0gU2VjdXJlIEludGVybmV0IENvbm5lY3Rpdml0eTEnMCUGA1UECxMeTkVU QVNRIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gQXV0aG9yaXR5MIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIB CgKCAQEAwYBPi3ref6t0tuJMoj5R4H7sa+WMSZwDh4XHjZV5e6P6LObyrleC6oNFDZJrgBtK k9Swzfnnf4m3xc0QS9kKCPLFwLpmIK3RCx0K4YYi+uBrrL347kH4UPfrI6KvrYcFpG3YwFZU K+7LZn/Y9HSB6n4gvdiCk7cmkuFr1ifFtDYZqktNUss9yQCPqh0d9dXfuhRV8vyggvVkcfTZ cCyVpRaDYaDm0j30Urba62KsKxfh6cEAt6kmPUxviGVaoEiiaABDZVSu6PjS17qDcZaQzlnw hLacKyM1zR7+lvfFR03/h6m8JYGBPMP7zccH2uJfufh+Of3AvOfCFZFcNhzHCwIDAQABo2Mw YTAdBgNVHQ4EFgQUJyrrHdlE2joXc2oJICDJJaj5f7IwHwYDVR0jBBgwFoAUJyrrHdlE2joX c2oJICDJJaj5f7IwDwYDVR0TAQH/BAUwAwEB/zAOBgNVHQ8BAf8EBAMCAQYwDQYJKoZIhvcN AQEEBQADggEBAJclqFN/WqYmhcZlXabrw6KJQNq/TK6TLDHzwZVcyjn0QhujHRr+EcVpaE1p IS4fjsywzpINE3fe9DSlC4IzyeqDq3EtM4eQDSXm4YRGLZp8X2M5TdccmxlElDgZzlVXMOlo /Ehhh4vqzSbc1M4FEfETiEV+vLX5MaWEHH8dmzlEL632mOme19QJN6BQKJPmCCj1VbxJDrJS pF01kXFJUtyrA0ilrEG0mA+FLFjfsWuZXzYEPjv1/FIPMlSnCCiW8ZSzwstQX2BhLEi0ugZJ RpakVMY/TkdoLEErYt0mjZD+d/oXFR7QNzMxAHpDEPmlZRotP1W7sO6kpBP7lyh/Yc4xggJ8 MIICeAIBATCBoDCBkTELMAkGA1UEBhMCRlIxDTALBgNVBAgTBE5vcmQxGjAYBgNVBAcTEVZp bGxlbmV1dmUgZCdBc2NxMS4wLAYDVQQKEyVORVRBU1EgLSBTZWN1cmUgSW50ZXJuZXQgQ29u bmVjdGl2aXR5MScwJQYDVQQLEx5ORVRBU1EgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkCCnDG sUgWa/KQal0wCQYFKw4DAhoFAKCBsTAYBgkqhkiG9w0BCQMxCwYJKoZIhvcNAQcBMBwGCSqG SIb3DQEJBTEPFw0wNzEwMTcxNDQyNDlaMCMGCSqGSIb3DQEJBDEWBBS4rj7AvfENnE5OiBxj kJQqPdfWfjBSBgkqhkiG9w0BCQ8xRTBDMAoGCCqGSIb3DQMHMA4GCCqGSIb3DQMCAgIAgDAN BggqhkiG9w0DAgIBQDAHBgUrDgMCBzANBggqhkiG9w0DAgIBKDANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAASC AQARs+ubbj/hDk3RFtvUjAsVU9turORLP/6H9mvkaxfoOZJDnT2a/dVg/gnAYnthH6OL8Qwp Ne34yNsvim6PBydPen/m0y/vu4JjvnC1bGcw4uZlJfrhMXM/VtgrdVPReQbjtV1Bh083W2VF k1kfyqEsMwyLJtNd2QaSpTKGUa+Lp/+k413iweNFYVjYJ6R+v/5q2EueARhLG4NR4TVP1yCY +OciBHXIKDyfCOHY5SQNKKym0Mn6BiALgpTmGZPkX6vHQZHg6yyBr8lrC5wKz0Z+SUQG5PYx PH8OdTrMXIuu5y2DnVu1UYfNuIsAoUuOuFnpnEmlxX4VNYmC5DKs+bWu --LQksG6bCIzRHxTLp-- --===============0049092481== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec --===============0049092481==-- From Fishpawtbt@davidrigano.com Wed Oct 17 13:09:25 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IiCOb-00050i-N4 for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 13:09:25 -0400 Received: from [195.34.115.130] (helo=[195.34.115.130]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IiCOb-0002vq-0m for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 13:09:25 -0400 Received: from Gioranidis ([100.192.121.22]:12968 "EHLO Gioranidis" smtp-auth: TLS-CIPHER: TLS-PEER-CN1: ) by [195.34.115.130] with ESMTP id S22MFWYAEFILCLYC (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Oct 2007 20:10:04 +0300 Message-ID: <000e01c810e0$794ff0e0$827322c3@Gioranidis> From: "Yunfei Fishpaw" To: Subject: ucselucn Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 20:09:27 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0009_01C810F9.9E9D28E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 X-Spam-Score: 2.8 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 8abaac9e10c826e8252866cbe6766464 ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C810F9.9E9D28E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable hey there ipsec-archive stretch her ass wide open with your new dick size http://www.hazis.com/ Yunfei Fishpaw ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C810F9.9E9D28E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
hey there ipsec-archive
stretch her ass wide open with your new dick=20 size
http://www.hazis.com/
Yunfei Fishpaw
------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C810F9.9E9D28E0-- From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 17 13:32:56 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IiCda-00073q-Cs; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 13:24:54 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IiCdY-00071x-39 for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 13:24:52 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IiCdX-0006y5-1A for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 13:24:51 -0400 Received: from ins1.sd.spawar.navy.mil ([128.49.4.2]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IiCdM-000491-81 for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 13:24:49 -0400 Received: from [128.49.163.29] (2872sun.spawar.navy.mil [128.49.163.29]) by ins1.sd.spawar.navy.mil (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l9HHNINE029584 for ; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:23:18 -0700 Message-ID: <47164506.9020902@spawar.navy.mil> Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:23:18 -0700 From: Jeffrey Sun User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20061219) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ipsec@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8abaac9e10c826e8252866cbe6766464 Subject: [IPsec] Re IKEv2 - INVALID_IKE_SPI/INVALID_SPI & Protocol ID X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Hi Everyone, Found some minor issues that I thought I'd bring up. A. INVALID_IKE_SPI & INVALID_SPI (RFC4718-Section 7.7) If Bob receives an IKE request message with unknown SPIs, he MAY send an one-way INFORMATIONAL request message containing a N(INVALID_IKE_SPI) Payload to Alice. Regarding the IKE Header, Bob copies the IKE SPIs and Message IDs from the IKE request message with unknown SPIs. What about the Flags Field? Safe to assume he should fill out the Version Flag according to his specifications, set the Response Bit to ZERO, and invert the Initiator Bit based on what he received in the IKE request message with unknown SPIs? This leads to the case of INVALID_SPI (i.e. ESP or AH Packet)...in an analogous scenario, their is no previous Message ID to copy or Flags Field to parse. I assume then, like the IKE SPIs, the Message ID set to ZERO and the Flags Field's Initiator Bit be set to ZERO. Thus, in the context of an one-way INFORMATIONAL request message with a N(INVALID_SPI) Payload, the Flags Field's Initiator Bit should essentially be ignored. B. Protocol ID (RFC4718-Section 7.8) Section 7.8 calls out the N(REKEY_SA) Payload and the N(INVALID_SELECTORS) Payload as the only two payloads that require a NON-ZERO Protocol ID assignment. I would think that the N(INVALID_SPI) Payload would also be included requiring a NON-ZERO Protocol ID assignment (i.e. AH or ESP). Thanks in advance for the help. If I totally overlooked something, my apologies. - Jeff Sun _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Wed Oct 17 14:42:50 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IiDm0-00036D-2p; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 14:37:40 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IiDly-00032w-1w for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 14:37:38 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IiDlx-00031s-6N for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 14:37:37 -0400 Received: from indelg01.tcs.com ([203.200.109.55]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IiDlp-0006qG-7A for ipsec@ietf.org; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 14:37:37 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.21,290,1188757800"; d="scan'208";a="76941163" Received: from unknown (HELO InDelM02.tcs.com) ([172.21.161.40]) by indelg01.tcs.com with ESMTP; 18 Oct 2007 00:07:15 +0530 To: Vaibhav agarwal MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Vikrant Mittal Subject: Re: [Ipsec] Can racoon initiate IKE negotiation only for one IP Sensitivity: Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 00:07:13 +0530 Message-ID: X-Mailer: Lotus Domino Web Server Release 6.5.5FP2HF415 June 20, 2007 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on InDelM02/TCS(Release 6.5.5FP2HF415 | June 20, 2007) at 10/18/2007 00:07:15 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-) X-Scan-Signature: 287c806b254c6353fcb09ee0e53bbc5e Cc: ipsec@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0524904729==" Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org --===============0524904729== Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" PFA+SGksPC9QPgo8UD5UdW5uZWxzJm5ic3A7ZGVwZW5kcyBvbiB0aGUgd2F5IHlvdSBhcmUgdHJp Z2dyaW5nIHRoZSBJS0UgbmVnb3RpYXRpb24uIElmIHlvdSB1c2UgYW55IGJyb2FkY2FzdCBtYWNo YW5pc20gbGlrZSBwaW5nIHRoaXMgc2NlbmFyaW9uIHdpbGwgYmUgdGhlcmUuIDwvUD4KPFA+WW91 IGNhbiB1c2UsIHNheSB0Y3Agc2VydmVyIGNvbmZpZ3VyZWQgb24gcGFydGljdWxhciBJUCB0byB0 cmlnZ2VyIElLRSBuZW90aWF0aW9uLjwvUD4KPFA+T3RoZXIgb3B0aW9uIGlzIHRvIHVwZGF0ZSB5 b3VyIGNvbmYgZmlsZS48QlI+PC9QPgo8UD5DaGVlcnM8QlI+VmlrcmFudCBNaXR0YWw8QlI+VGF0 YSBDb25zdWx0YW5jeSBTZXJ2aWNlczxCUj5NYWlsdG86IHZpa3JhbnQubWl0dGFsQHRjcy5jb208 QlI+V2Vic2l0ZTogPEEgaHJlZj0iaHR0cDovL3d3dy50Y3MuY29tIj5odHRwOi8vd3d3LnRjcy5j b208L0E+PEJSPl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fPEJS PkV4cGVyaWVuY2UgY2VydGFpbnR5LiBJVCBTZXJ2aWNlczxCUj5CdXNpbmVzcyBTb2x1dGlvbnM8 QlI+T3V0c291cmNpbmc8QlI+X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX18gPC9QPgo8VEFCTEUgY2VsbFNwYWNpbmc9MCBjZWxsUGFkZGluZz0wIHdpZHRoPSIxMDAl IiBib3JkZXI9MCBWNURPVEJMPSJ0cnVlIj4KCjxUUiB2QWxpZ249dG9wPgo8VEQgd2lkdGg9IjM3 JSIgYmdDb2xvcj0jZTFlMWUxIHJvd1NwYW49NT48SU1HIGhlaWdodD0xIGFsdD0iIiBzcmM9Ii9p Y29ucy9lY2JsYW5rLmdpZiIgd2lkdGg9MSBib3JkZXI9MD48QlI+CjxESVYgYWxpZ249Y2VudGVy PjxCPjxGT05UIHN0eWxlPSJGT05ULVNJWkU6IDlwdCI+VmFpYmhhdiBhZ2Fyd2FsICZsdDt2YWli aGF2LmFnYXJ3YWxAYXJpY2VudC5jb20mZ3Q7PC9GT05UPjwvQj4gCjxQPjxGT05UIHN0eWxlPSJG T05ULVNJWkU6IDlwdCI+MTAvMTcvMjAwNyAwMzozNCBNU1Q8L0ZPTlQ+PC9QPjwvRElWPjwvVEQ+ CjxURCB3aWR0aD0iMSUiIGJnQ29sb3I9I2UxZTFlMT48SU1HIGhlaWdodD0xIGFsdD0iIiBzcmM9 Ii9pY29ucy9lY2JsYW5rLmdpZiIgd2lkdGg9MTAyIGJvcmRlcj0wPjxCUj4KPERJViBhbGlnbj1y aWdodD48Rk9OVCBzdHlsZT0iRk9OVC1TSVpFOiA5cHQiPlRvPC9GT05UPiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOzwv RElWPjwvVEQ+CjxURCB3aWR0aD0iNjMlIiBiZ0NvbG9yPSNlMWUxZTE+PElNRyBoZWlnaHQ9MSBh bHQ9IiIgc3JjPSIvaWNvbnMvZWNibGFuay5naWYiIHdpZHRoPTEgYm9yZGVyPTA+PEJSPjxGT05U IHN0eWxlPSJGT05ULVNJWkU6IDlwdCI+aXBzZWNAaWV0Zi5vcmc8L0ZPTlQ+PC9URD48L1RSPgo8 VFIgdkFsaWduPXRvcD4KPFREIHdpZHRoPSIxJSIgYmdDb2xvcj0jZTFlMWUxPjxJTUcgaGVpZ2h0 PTEgYWx0PSIiIHNyYz0iL2ljb25zL2VjYmxhbmsuZ2lmIiB3aWR0aD0xMDIgYm9yZGVyPTA+PEJS Pgo8RElWIGFsaWduPXJpZ2h0PjxGT05UIHN0eWxlPSJGT05ULVNJWkU6IDlwdCI+Y2M8L0ZPTlQ+ Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7PC9ESVY+PC9URD4KPFREIHdpZHRoPSI2MyUiIGJnQ29sb3I9I2UxZTFlMT48 SU1HIGhlaWdodD0xIGFsdD0iIiBzcmM9Ii9pY29ucy9lY2JsYW5rLmdpZiIgd2lkdGg9MSBib3Jk ZXI9MD48QlI+PC9URD48L1RSPgo8VFIgdkFsaWduPXRvcD4KPFREIHdpZHRoPSIxJSIgYmdDb2xv cj0jZTFlMWUxPjxJTUcgaGVpZ2h0PTEgYWx0PSIiIHNyYz0iL2ljb25zL2VjYmxhbmsuZ2lmIiB3 aWR0aD0xMDIgYm9yZGVyPTA+PEJSPgo8RElWIGFsaWduPXJpZ2h0PjxGT05UIHN0eWxlPSJGT05U LVNJWkU6IDlwdCI+YmNjPC9GT05UPiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOzwvRElWPjwvVEQ+CjxURCB3aWR0aD0i NjMlIiBiZ0NvbG9yPSNlMWUxZTE+PElNRyBoZWlnaHQ9MSBhbHQ9IiIgc3JjPSIvaWNvbnMvZWNi bGFuay5naWYiIHdpZHRoPTEgYm9yZGVyPTA+PEJSPjwvVEQ+PC9UUj4KPFRSIHZBbGlnbj10b3A+ CjxURCB3aWR0aD0iMSUiIGJnQ29sb3I9I2UxZTFlMT48SU1HIGhlaWdodD0xIGFsdD0iIiBzcmM9 Ii9pY29ucy9lY2JsYW5rLmdpZiIgd2lkdGg9MTAyIGJvcmRlcj0wPjxCUj4KPERJViBhbGlnbj1y aWdodD48Rk9OVCBzdHlsZT0iRk9OVC1TSVpFOiA5cHQiPlN1YmplY3Q8L0ZPTlQ+Jm5ic3A7Jm5i c3A7PC9ESVY+PC9URD4KPFREIHdpZHRoPSI2MyUiIGJnQ29sb3I9I2UxZTFlMT48SU1HIGhlaWdo dD0xIGFsdD0iIiBzcmM9Ii9pY29ucy9lY2JsYW5rLmdpZiIgd2lkdGg9MSBib3JkZXI9MD48QlI+ PEZPTlQgc3R5bGU9IkZPTlQtU0laRTogOXB0Ij5bSXBzZWNdIENhbiByYWNvb24gaW5pdGlhdGUg SUtFIG5lZ290aWF0aW9uIG9ubHkgZm9yIG9uZSBJUDwvRk9OVD48L1REPjwvVFI+CjxUUiB2QWxp Z249dG9wPgo8VEQgd2lkdGg9MCUgYmdDb2xvcj0jZTFlMWUxPjxJTUcgaGVpZ2h0PTEgYWx0PSIi IHNyYz0iL2ljb25zL2VjYmxhbmsuZ2lmIiB3aWR0aD0xIGJvcmRlcj0wPjwvVEQ+CjxURCB3aWR0 aD0iNjMlIiBiZ0NvbG9yPSNlMWUxZTE+PElNRyBoZWlnaHQ9MSBhbHQ9IiIgc3JjPSIvaWNvbnMv ZWNibGFuay5naWYiIHdpZHRoPTEgYm9yZGVyPTA+PEJSPjxGT05UIHNpemU9LTE+PC9GT05UPjwv VEQ+PC9UUj48L1RBQkxFPjxCUj48VFQ+SGksPEJSPjwvVFQ+PEJSPjxUVD5JIGhhdmUgb25lIG5l dHdvcmsgaW50ZXJmYWNlIHdpdGggdHdvIElQLCB0aGUgZmlyc3Q8QlI+PC9UVD48VFQ+b25lIGlz IDEwLjExOC4yMTMuMTEzKGV0aDApIGFuZCB0aGUgb3RoZXIgaXMgMTAuMTE4LjIxMy4xMDQgKGV0 aDEpPEJSPjwvVFQ+PFRUPkF0IHRoZSBtb21lbnQsIEkgd2FudCB0byBzZXR1cCBvbmUgSVBTZWMg dHVubmVscyB3aXRoPEJSPjwvVFQ+PFRUPnRoZSByZW1vdGUgbWFjaGluZToxMC4xMTguMjEzLjY5 KGV0aDApLjwvVFQ+PEJSPgo8VUw+PFRUPkJ1dCB3aGVuIEkgdXNlIGxvY2FsIG1hY2hpbmUgdG8g dHJpZ2dlciB0aGUgSUtFIG5lZ290aWF0aW9uLDxCUj48L1RUPjxUVD5yYWNvb24gdXNlcyAxMC4x MTguMjEzLjExMyBhbmQgMTAuMTE4LjIxMy4xMDQgYm90aCBhcyB0aGUgc291cmNlIElQIHN1Y2g8 L1RUPjwvVUw+PFRUPnRoYXQ8QlI+PC9UVD48VFQ+dHVubmVsIGlzIGVzdGFibGlzaCBiL3cgYm90 aCB0aGUgSVAgMTAuMTE4LjIxMy4xMTMgJmFtcDsgMTAuMTE4LjIxMy42OSBhbmQ8L1RUPjxCUj48 VFQ+MTAuMTE4LjIxMy4xMDQgJmFtcDsgMTAuMTE4LjIxMy42OS48QlI+PC9UVD48QlI+PFRUPkJ1 dCBJIHdhbnQgYSB0dW5uZWwgJm5ic3A7b25seSBiL3cgb25lIElQIDEwLjExOC4yMTMuMTEzICZh bXA7IDEwLjExOC4yMTMuNjkuIGFuZCBJPEJSPjwvVFQ+PFRUPndhbnQgMTAuMTE4LjIxMy4xMDQg SVAgcGluZyBmcm9tIGFueSBtYWNoaW5lIChJIHdhbnQgbm8gdHVubmVsIGNyZWF0ZWQgd2l0aDxC Uj48L1RUPjxUVD50aGUgMTAuMTE4LjIxMy4xMDQgSVApLjxCUj48L1RUPjxCUj48VFQ+TXkgc2V0 a2V5LmNvbmYgPEEgaHJlZj0iZmlsZTotIj5maWxlOi08L0E+PEJSPjwvVFQ+PFRUPiMgRmx1c2gg dGhlIFNBRCBhbmQgU1BEPEJSPjwvVFQ+PFRUPmZsdXNoOzxCUj48L1RUPjxUVD5zcGRmbHVzaDs8 QlI+PC9UVD48QlI+PFRUPiMgQ3JlYXRlIHBvbGljaWVzIGZvciByYWNvb248QlI+PC9UVD48VFQ+ c3BkYWRkIDEwLjExOC4yMTMuNjkvMjQgMTAuMTE4LjIxMy4xMTMvMjQgYW55IC1QIGluIGlwc2Vj PC9UVD4gCjxVTD4KPFVMPgo8VUw+CjxVTD48VFQ+ZXNwL3R1bm5lbC8xMC4xMTguMjEzLjY5LTEw LjExOC4yMTMuMTEzL3JlcXVpcmU7PEJSPjwvVFQ+PC9VTD48L1VMPjwvVUw+PC9VTD48VFQ+c3Bk YWRkIDEwLjExOC4yMTMuMTEzLzI0IDEwLjExOC4yMTMuNjkvMjQgYW55IC1QIG91dCBpcHNlYzxC Uj48L1RUPjxUVD5lc3AvdHVubmVsLzEwLjExOC4yMTMuMTEzLTEwLjExOC4yMTMuNjkvcmVxdWly ZTs8L1RUPjxCUj48QlI+PFRUPk15IHJhY29vbi5jb25mIGZpbGUgOi08QlI+PC9UVD48QlI+PFRU PnBhdGggaW5jbHVkZSAiL2V0Yy9yYWNvb24iOzxCUj48L1RUPjxUVD4jcGF0aCBwcmVfc2hhcmVk X2tleSAiL2V0Yy9yYWNvb24vcHNrLnR4dCI7PEJSPjwvVFQ+PFRUPnBhdGggY2VydGlmaWNhdGUg Ii9ldGMvcmFjb29uL2NlcnRzIjs8QlI+PC9UVD48QlI+PFRUPnJlbW90ZSAxMC4xMTguMjEzLjY5 PEJSPjwvVFQ+PFRUPns8L1RUPiAKPFVMPgo8VUw+CjxVTD48VFQ+ZXhjaGFuZ2VfbW9kZSBtYWlu OzxCUj48L1RUPjxUVD5saWZldGltZSB0aW1lIDI0aG91cjs8QlI+PC9UVD48VFQ+Y2VydGlmaWNh dGVfdHlwZSB4NTA5ICJybmNwZXQxMTNfY2VydC5wZW0iICJybmNwZXQxMTNfa2V5LnBlbSI7PEJS PjwvVFQ+PFRUPnZlcmlmeV9jZXJ0IG9mZjs8QlI+PC9UVD48VFQ+bXlfaWRlbnRpZmllciBhc24x ZG47PEJSPjwvVFQ+PFRUPnBlZXJzX2lkZW50aWZpZXIgYXNuMWRuOzwvVFQ+PEJSPjxUVD5wcm9w b3NhbCAmbmJzcDt7PEJSPjwvVFQ+PFRUPmVuY3J5cHRpb25fYWxnb3JpdGhtIDNkZXM7PEJSPjwv VFQ+PFRUPmhhc2hfYWxnb3JpdGhtIG1kNTs8QlI+PC9UVD48VFQ+YXV0aGVudGljYXRpb25fbWV0 aG9kIHJzYXNpZzs8QlI+PC9UVD48VFQ+ZGhfZ3JvdXAgMjs8L1RUPjwvVUw+PC9VTD48L1VMPjxU VD59PEJSPjwvVFQ+PFRUPn08QlI+PC9UVD48QlI+PFRUPnNhaW5mbyBhZGRyZXNzIDEwLjExOC4y MTMuMTEzLzI0IGFueSBhZGRyZXNzIDEwLjExOC4yMTMuNjkvMjQgYW55IHs8QlI+PC9UVD48VFQ+ cGZzX2dyb3VwIDI7PC9UVD48QlI+PFRUPmxpZmV0aW1lIHRpbWUgMjQgaG91ciA7PEJSPjwvVFQ+ PFRUPmVuY3J5cHRpb25fYWxnb3JpdGhtIDNkZXMgOzxCUj48L1RUPjxUVD5hdXRoZW50aWNhdGlv bl9hbGdvcml0aG0gaG1hY19tZDUgOzxCUj48L1RUPjxUVD5jb21wcmVzc2lvbl9hbGdvcml0aG0g ZGVmbGF0ZSA7PC9UVD48QlI+PFRUPn08QlI+PC9UVD48QlI+PEJSPgo8VUw+PFRUPkNhbiBhbnlv bmUgaGVscCBtZSA/PEJSPjwvVFQ+PC9VTD48VFQ+VmFpYmhhdjxCUj48L1RUPjxUVD4tLTxCUj48 L1RUPjxUVD5WaWV3IHRoaXMgbWVzc2FnZSBpbiBjb250ZXh0OiA8QSBocmVmPSJodHRwOi8vd3d3 Lm5hYmJsZS5jb20vQ2FuLXJhY29vbi1pbml0aWF0ZS1JS0UtbmVnb3RpYXRpb24tb25seS1mb3It b25lLUlQLXRmNDYzOTQ1OS5odG1sI2ExMzI1MDgwOSI+aHR0cDovL3d3dy5uYWJibGUuY29tL0Nh bi1yYWNvb24taW5pdGlhdGUtSUtFLW5lZ290aWF0aW9uLW9ubHktZm9yLW9uZS1JUC10ZjQ2Mzk0 NTkuaHRtbCNhMTMyNTA4MDk8L0E+PEJSPjwvVFQ+PFRUPlNlbnQgZnJvbSB0aGUgSUVURiAtIElw c2VjIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdCBhcmNoaXZlIGF0IE5hYmJsZS5jb20uPEJSPjwvVFQ+PEJSPjxCUj48 QlI+PFRUPl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fPEJS PjwvVFQ+PFRUPklQc2VjIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdDxCUj48L1RUPjxUVD5JUHNlY0BpZXRmLm9yZzxC Uj48L1RUPjxUVD48QSBocmVmPSJodHRwczovL3d3dzEuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5m by9pcHNlYyI+aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cxLmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vaXBzZWM8L0E+ PC9UVD48QlI+PEZPTlQgc3R5bGU9IkZPTlQtU0laRTogMXB0IiBjb2xvcj0jZmZmZmZmPkZvcndh cmRTb3VyY2VJRDpOVDAwMDJDMDVBIDwvRk9OVD48cHJlPj09PT09LS0tLS09PT09PS0tLS0tPT09 PT0KTm90aWNlOiBUaGUgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gY29udGFpbmVkIGluIHRoaXMgZS1tYWlsCm1lc3Nh Z2UgYW5kL29yIGF0dGFjaG1lbnRzIHRvIGl0IG1heSBjb250YWluIApjb25maWRlbnRpYWwgb3Ig cHJpdmlsZWdlZCBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbi4gSWYgeW91IGFyZSAKbm90IHRoZSBpbnRlbmRlZCByZWNp cGllbnQsIGFueSBkaXNzZW1pbmF0aW9uLCB1c2UsIApyZXZpZXcsIGRpc3RyaWJ1dGlvbiwgcHJp bnRpbmcgb3IgY29weWluZyBvZiB0aGUgCmluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGNvbnRhaW5lZCBpbiB0aGlzIGUt bWFpbCBtZXNzYWdlIAphbmQvb3IgYXR0YWNobWVudHMgdG8gaXQgYXJlIHN0cmljdGx5IHByb2hp Yml0ZWQuIElmIAp5b3UgaGF2ZSByZWNlaXZlZCB0aGlzIGNvbW11bmljYXRpb24gaW4gZXJyb3Is IApwbGVhc2Ugbm90aWZ5IHVzIGJ5IHJlcGx5IGUtbWFpbCBvciB0ZWxlcGhvbmUgYW5kIAppbW1l ZGlhdGVseSBhbmQgcGVybWFuZW50bHkgZGVsZXRlIHRoZSBtZXNzYWdlIAphbmQgYW55IGF0dGFj aG1lbnRzLiBUaGFuayB5b3UKCgo8L3ByZT4= --===============0524904729== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec --===============0524904729==-- From xapteippariduj@teippari.com Wed Oct 17 22:23:13 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IiL2W-0002vx-R5; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 22:23:12 -0400 Received: from [196.205.193.18] (helo=SpeedTouch.lan) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IiL2Q-00054a-AC; Wed, 17 Oct 2007 22:23:10 -0400 Received: from [196.205.193.18] by teippari.com; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 04:22:17 +0200 Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 04:22:17 +0200 From: "Janis Simons" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.0) Professional Reply-To: xapteippariduj@teippari.com X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <376838882.56137233003391@teippari.com> To: 6lowpan@lists.ietf.org Subject: Dear Customer Feel Good Now! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----------DA0C51A213D36E82" X-Spam-Score: 3.3 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: cab78e1e39c4b328567edb48482b6a69 ------------DA0C51A213D36E82 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Newsletter: My respective client, After all our NEW pharmaceutics I-net page is bringing out!!! As usually we proffer only: - All general medicines are available! - We transporting all over theplanet - No Healthcare advisor Attendances - No Recipies - Total Client Contentment See our Newly-opened Discount Store and PRESERVE your greens!!! http://lessvoice.cn/ ------------DA0C51A213D36E82 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Newsletter:

My respective client,
After all our NEW pharmaceutics I-net page is bringing out!!!

As usually we proffer only:
- All general medicines are available!
- We transporting all over theplanet
- No Healthcare advisor Attendances
- No Recipies
- Total Client Contentment

See our Newly-opened Discount Store and PRESERVE your greens!!!

http://lessvoice.cn/ ------------DA0C51A213D36E82-- From GalendecantMorse@earthweb.com Thu Oct 18 02:10:40 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IiOae-0005d8-8V for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 02:10:40 -0400 Received: from pool-72-74-204-152.bstnma.east.verizon.net ([72.74.204.152] helo=xxxdellxxx.myhome.westell.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IiOaN-0002cn-R5 for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 02:10:24 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by host19515363.earthweb.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id bp5fenPB48.205426.GlI.Xu1.5808618321616 for ; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 02:10:27 +0500 Message-ID: <2459201c8114d$b05cb9c0$2e01a8c0@XXXDELLXXX> From: "Nestor Camacho" To: Subject: Confirmation link Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 02:10:27 +0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_2458E_01C8114D.B05CB9C0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d16ce744298aacf98517bc7c108bd198 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_2458E_01C8114D.B05CB9C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Even if you have no erection problems Viagra would help you to make = better sex more often and to bring unimaginable plesure to her. Just = disolve half a pill under your tongue and get ready for action in 30 = minutes. The tests showed that the majority of men after taking this = medication were able to have perfect erection during 24 hours! Package Quantity Price in your local drugstore* Our price LearnMoreNow 10 tabs 20 doses $99.95 $34.49 30 tabs 60 doses $299.95 $88.50 60 tabs 120 doses $449.95 $141.02 90 tabs 180 doses $769.95 $176.40 180 tabs 360 doses $1299.95 $298.46 When you are young and stressed up… When you are aged and never give up… Viagra gives you confidence in any chance, every time. ------=_NextPart_000_2458E_01C8114D.B05CB9C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20

Even if you have no erection problems = Viagra would=20 help you to make better sex more often and to bring unimaginable = plesure=20 to her. Just disolve half a pill under your tongue and get ready for = action in=20 30 minutes. The tests showed that the majority of men after taking = this=20 medication were able to have perfect erection during 24 hours!

Package Quantity Price in your = local drugstore* Our = price

Learn
More
Now

10 tabs 20 doses $99.95 $34.49
30 tabs 60 doses $299.95 $88.50
60 tabs 120 doses $449.95 $141.02
90 tabs 180 doses $769.95 $176.40
180 tabs 360 doses $1299.95 $298.46

When you are young and stressed = up…
When you are aged and never give up…
Viagra gives you confidence in any chance, every time.

------=_NextPart_000_2458E_01C8114D.B05CB9C0-- From ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Thu Oct 18 03:24:40 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IiPdR-0000wf-U4; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 03:17:37 -0400 Received: from ipsec by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1IiPdR-0000wa-8J for ipsec-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 03:17:37 -0400 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IiPdQ-0000wS-G0 for ipsec@ietf.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 03:17:36 -0400 Received: from kuber.nabble.com ([216.139.236.158]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IiPdP-0004TE-N9 for ipsec@ietf.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 03:17:36 -0400 Received: from isper.nabble.com ([192.168.236.156]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1IiPdP-0008Pr-3r for ipsec@ietf.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 00:17:35 -0700 Message-ID: <13269259.post@talk.nabble.com> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 00:17:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Vaibhav agarwal To: ipsec@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Ipsec] Can racoon initiate IKE negotiation only for one IP In-Reply-To: <20071017144249.GA91056@darkstar.netasq.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Nabble-From: vaibhav.agarwal@aricent.com References: <13250809.post@talk.nabble.com> <20071017144249.GA91056@darkstar.netasq.com> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 36b1f8810cb91289d885dc8ab4fc8172 X-BeenThere: ipsec@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IPsec protocols List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ipsec-bounces@ietf.org Hi, I have added listen section in racoon.conf file but now local machine to trigger the IKE negotiation racoon uses only for 10.118.213.113 IP. but 10.118.213.104 IP only ping from 10.118.213.69 machine not any other machine please tell the reason. raccon log of 10.118.213.69 machine gives some warrning , I am sending the racoon log :- Racoon log of 10.118.213.69 machine:- Foreground mode. 2007-10-18 12:50:54: INFO: @(#)ipsec-tools 0.3.3 (http://ipsec-tools.sourceforge.net) 2007-10-18 12:50:54: INFO: @(#)This product linked OpenSSL 0.9.7a Feb 19 2003 (http://www.openssl.org/) 2007-10-18 12:50:54: INFO: 10.118.213.69[500] used as isakmp port (fd=7) 2007-10-18 12:50:58: INFO: IPsec-SA request for 10.118.213.113 queued due to no phase1 found. 2007-10-18 12:50:58: INFO: initiate new phase 1 negotiation: 10.118.213.69[500]<=>10.118.213.113[500] 2007-10-18 12:50:58: INFO: begin Identity Protection mode. 2007-10-18 12:50:58: WARNING: remote address mismatched. db=10.118.213.113[500], act=10.118.213.104[500] 2007-10-18 12:50:58: WARNING: remote address mismatched. db=10.118.213.113[500], act=10.118.213.104[500] 2007-10-18 12:50:58: INFO: ISAKMP-SA established 10.118.213.69[500]-10.118.213.113[500] spi:95d29eae6682129f:f5d43b8286e216f5 2007-10-18 12:50:58: WARNING: remote address mismatched. db=10.118.213.113[500], act=10.118.213.104[500] 2007-10-18 12:50:59: INFO: initiate new phase 2 negotiation: 10.118.213.69[0]<=>10.118.213.113[0] 2007-10-18 12:50:59: WARNING: remote address mismatched. db=10.118.213.113[500], act=10.118.213.104[500] 2007-10-18 12:50:59: WARNING: remote address mismatched. db=10.118.213.113[500], act=10.118.213.104[500] 2007-10-18 12:50:59: INFO: IPsec-SA established: ESP/Tunnel 10.118.213.113->10.118.213.69 spi=14661549(0xdfb7ad) 2007-10-18 12:50:59: INFO: IPsec-SA established: ESP/Tunnel 10.118.213.69->10.118.213.113 spi=222237002(0xd3f114a) 2007-10-18 12:50:59: INFO: IPsec-SA established: ESP/Tunnel 10.118.213.113->10.118.213.69 spi=177706358(0xa979576) 2007-10-18 12:50:59: INFO: IPsec-SA established: ESP/Tunnel 10.118.213.69->10.118.213.113 spi=64808335(0x3dce58f) Racoon log of 10.118.213.113 machine:- [root@ihspadev1 etc]# racoon -F -f racoon/racoon.conf Foreground mode. 2007-10-18 10:06:22: INFO: @(#)ipsec-tools 0.3.3 (http://ipsec-tools.sourceforge.net) 2007-10-18 10:06:22: INFO: @(#)This product linked OpenSSL 0.9.7a Feb 19 2003 (http://www.openssl.org/) 2007-10-18 10:06:23: INFO: 10.118.213.113[500] used as isakmp port (fd=7) 2007-10-18 10:06:41: INFO: IPsec-SA request for 10.118.213.69 queued due to no phase1 found. 2007-10-18 10:06:41: INFO: initiate new phase 1 negotiation: 10.118.213.113[500]<=>10.118.213.69[500] 2007-10-18 10:06:41: INFO: begin Identity Protection mode. 2007-10-18 10:07:12: ERROR: phase2 negotiation failed due to time up waiting for phase1. ESP 10.118.213.69->10.118.213.113 2007-10-18 10:07:12: INFO: delete phase 2 handler. 2007-10-18 10:07:21: INFO: request for establishing IPsec-SA was queued due to no phase1 found. 2007-10-18 10:07:41: ERROR: phase1 negotiation failed due to time up. 08b3397e68265732:0000000000000000 2007-10-18 10:07:49: INFO: respond new phase 1 negotiation: 10.118.213.113[500]<=>10.118.213.69[500] 2007-10-18 10:07:49: INFO: begin Identity Protection mode. 2007-10-18 10:07:50: INFO: initiate new phase 2 negotiation: 10.118.213.113[0]<=>10.118.213.69[0] 2007-10-18 10:07:50: INFO: respond new phase 2 negotiation: 10.118.213.113[0]<=>10.118.213.69[0] 2007-10-18 10:07:50: INFO: IPsec-SA established: ESP/Tunnel 10.118.213.69->10.118.213.113 spi=64808335(0x3dce58f) 2007-10-18 10:07:50: INFO: IPsec-SA established: ESP/Tunnel 10.118.213.113->10.118.213.69 spi=177706358(0xa979576) 2007-10-18 10:07:50: INFO: IPsec-SA established: ESP/Tunnel 10.118.213.69->10.118.213.113 spi=222237002(0xd3f114a) 2007-10-18 10:07:50: INFO: IPsec-SA established: ESP/Tunnel 10.118.213.113->10.118.213.69 spi=14661549(0xdfb7ad) 2007-10-18 10:09:09: INFO: purged IPsec-SA proto_id=ESP spi=177706358. 2007-10-18 10:09:09: INFO: purged IPsec-SA proto_id=ESP spi=14661549. 2007-10-18 10:09:10: INFO: purged ISAKMP-SA proto_id=ISAKMP spi=95d29eae6682129f:f5d43b8286e216f5. Vaibhav VANHULLEBUS Yvan-3 wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 05:12:49AM -0700, Vaibhav agarwal wrote: >> >> Hi, > > Hi. > > >> I have one network interface with two IP, the first >> one is 10.118.213.113(eth0) and the other is 10.118.213.104 (eth1) >> At the moment, I want to setup one IPSec tunnels with >> the remote machine:10.118.213.69(eth0). >> >> But when I use local machine to trigger the IKE negotiation, >> racoon uses 10.118.213.113 and 10.118.213.104 both as the source IP >> such >> that >> tunnel is establish b/w both the IP 10.118.213.113 & 10.118.213.69 >> and >> 10.118.213.104 & 10.118.213.69. > > Strange... > > [...] >> >> Can anyone help me ? > > Have a look at racoon.conf's man page, and add a 'listen' section to > your racoon.conf, when you'll only specify the local IP address you > want to use. > > > > Yvan. > > -- > NETASQ > http://www.netasq.com > > > _______________________________________________ > IPsec mailing list > IPsec@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Can-racoon-initiate-IKE-negotiation-only-for-one-IP-tf4639459.html#a13269259 Sent from the IETF - Ipsec mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ IPsec mailing list IPsec@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipsec From ip_sec@bp.sharekhan.com Thu Oct 18 03:41:40 2007 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IiQ0i-000378-NV for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 03:41:40 -0400 Received: from [122.162.105.88] (helo=ABTS-NCR-Dynamic-088.105.162.122.airtelbroadband.in) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IiQ0g-00053y-Df for ipsec-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 03:41:40 -0400 Content-Return: allowed X-Mailer: CME-V6.5.4.3; MSN Received: (qmail 4080 by uid 168); Thu, 18 Oct 2007 01:11:33 +0500 Message-Id: <20071018061133.4082.qmail@ABTS-NCR-Dynamic-088.105.162.122.airtelbroadband.in> To: Subject: Blctocxz Next Generation From: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Score: 4.3 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: f4c2cf0bccc868e4cc88dace71fb3f44


Big sazjyvinwhogs on yourkar RX - Click to buy Viagra for as low as $1.79

coords="169,0,346,60" coords="16,8,509,490" coords="21,186,515,222" coords="66,59,455,88" coords="104,20,424,41" coords="169,0,346,60" coords="16,8,509,490" coords="21,186,515,222" coords="66,59,455,88" coords="104,20,424,41"