Re: Gartner: IPsec Dead by 2008

[Anton Chuvakin <anton () chuvakin org>]

> > Well. IPsec is a backport from IPv6, and the DoD is supposed to be
> > 100% IPv6 by 2008, so I don't see where Gartner's going with that
> > statement.
>
> IPsec implementations for IPv6 are scarce and lag behind their IPv4
> counterparts.  Just because it's mandated by the standard doesn't mean
> it's widely deployed.

I am also *really* curious whether their "ipsec is dead" equals "IPv6
is threatened/dead"? I hear various things about IPv6 upcoming
adoption from "any day now" to "in another 20 years" to "its not
needed anymore" There is no chance that IPv6 will be adapted to the
absence of IPSec, so maybe our Gartner "friends" meant that "IPSec in
IPv4" is dead?

And, I suspect, "Gartner is dead" just won't happen, for better or for
worse. I vaguely remember seeing some survey that claimed that
reliance on analyst firm for purchases grows with technology
complexity. The survey might be all bullshit, but this argument seems
valid to me; way too many orgs want somebody to do the legwork for
them...

Best,
--
Anton Chuvakin, Ph.D., GCIA, GCIH, GCFA     http://www.chuvakin.org
http://www.securitywarrior.com

_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.