wiltzius@lll-lcc.aRpA (Dave P. Wiltzius) (06/07/88)
We at LLNL would like to use the IP security option. See the plea for help below. Also talked with people at LANL (sorry, the former is Lawrence Livermore Nat'l Lab and the latter is Los Alamos Nat'l Lab) and Sandia Labs. Apparently all three labs are ready to migrate to TCP/IP to some degree. All three, I think it is safe to say, will need one or both of the IP security options (LLNL apparently will need both). I would recommend getting familiar with RFC 1038 even though it is a draft since (at least a few) vendors are already complying with it. RFC 1038 specifies the use of the IP Basic security option and defines the IP Extended security option. I know of a few vendors of IP routers that intend to comply with RFC 1038 and one vendor of TCP/IP products for hosts (TWG) that intends to comply with it. Anyone know what kind of support for RFC 1038 can be expected from DEC (Ultrix in particular), SUN and others (Ardent, Silicon Graphics, etc)? The local sales folks want to help but . . . Thanks. Dave (wiltzius@lll-lcc.llnl.gov)