IPsec ESP Protocol with ACK and Sequence Numbers
Short answer
C Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP) provides the necessary sequence numbering and integrity checks for reliable IPsec communication.
Question
goal?
Key Takeaways
The core concept is distinguishing between the protocols that provide authentication/key exchange (IKE) versus those that provide payload security (ESP). The common trap is confusing IKEv2's session management ACKs with ESP's packet-level sequence numbers.
This question tests knowledge of IPsec protocol components, specifically Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP), which provides both encryption and reliability features like sequence numbers.
Common mistake: Many candidates incorrectly select IKEv1 (B) because they associate 'authentication' with IKE. However, IKEv1 does not support ACK mechanisms (unlike IKEv2), and neither IKE version handles the sequence/ACK requirements for the data payload itself.
Expert Analysis
Why the Answer Is Correct
Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP) is the correct answer because it operates at the IPsec protocol layer to protect the actual data traffic. ESP includes a Sequence Number field in its header to prevent replay attacks, which serves the purpose of tracking packet order and ensuring reliability. While the question asks for an 'authentication protocol,' in the context of Cisco exams, this often refers to the component providing integrity and anti-replay services, which ESP does via its ICV (Integrity Check Value) and sequence numbers.
Why the Other Options Are Wrong
AES-256 (A) and AES-192 (D) are symmetric encryption algorithms used within IPsec, but they are not protocols themselves and do not handle sequencing or acknowledgment logic. IKEv1 (B) is a key exchange protocol; while it authenticates peers, it lacks the embedded ACK mechanism found in IKEv2 and does not manage packet sequences for the data tunnel.
Community Comment Notes
Community consensus strongly favors ESP (C). Users point out that AES options are just ciphers, eliminating them immediately. Comments highlight that IKEv1 does not have ACKs, whereas IKEv2 does, making IKEv1 incorrect for any protocol relying on acknowledgments. One user notes the question phrasing is slightly misleading by calling ESP an 'authentication protocol,' but correctly identifies it as the only option with sequence capabilities.
Official Reference
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4303.html
This link opens the official vendor documentation in a new tab.
Exam Strategy
When asked about 'sequence numbers' or 'replay protection' in IPsec, think ESP. When asked about 'key exchange' or 'peer authentication', think IKE. Don't let the word 'authentication' distract you from the functional requirement of sequence handling, which is specific to the payload protocol.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does ESP provide authentication?
Why is IKEv1 wrong for ACK requirements?
Discussion 14 contributions
Compiled from public community threads and reader submissions, lightly edited for clarity. Handles and vote tallies are shown as recorded, and comments reflect the views of individual contributors.
From public community threads 14
-
NoUserName1234 👍 5Answer 'C' : https://www.hypr.com/security-encyclopedia/encapsulating-security-payload-esp
-
Ko13 👍 2 Answered BIkev1 does authentication and a has a handshake process https://www.cisco.com/c/es_mx/support/docs/security-vpn/ipsec-negotiation-ike-protocols/217432-understand-ipsec-ikev1-protocol.html
-
Rododendron2 👍 2 Answered CESP - it has ACK & sequence numbers, not IKEv1 But call it authentication protocol is misleading. Shame on you, Cisco
-
gorequill 👍 2 Answered Chttps://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7402.html
-
CyberGhost666 👍 2 Answered CI’ll go with ESP
Show 9 more comments
-
Silexis 👍 1IKEv1 DOES NOT HAVE an ACK embeded mechanism like IKEv2. For example a SA_DELETE in IKEv1 is sent without confirmation because IKEv1 is using UDP which is a best effort protocol and while IKEv2 is using the same UDP, it has embedded ACK to correct the minuses of IKEv1. From all these - IKEv1 it is a wrong answer, making ESP the only option left. The question is crap, indeed (probably was talking about SPI inside ESP)
-
Tthurston1 👍 1 Answered BESP provides confidentiality, authentication, and integrity to IP Packets. It does NOT include mechanisms for acknowledging or sequencing messages - which is a requirement for this question. IKEv1 SUPPORTS acknowledgements and sequencing to ensure reliable delivery of messages during the negotiation process.
-
XBfoundX 👍 1 Answered CAES256 and 192, are cipher algorithms, Ikev1 does not support ack, so the only one that can be right is ESP, so the correct answer is C.
-
Rododendron2 👍 1Neither IKEv1 or ESP has ACK messages. IKEv1 has 6 messages, to negotiate tunnel, that's all. ESP sure does have sequence numbers.
-
Bubu3k 👍 1 Answered CIkev1 does not have acks, ikev2 does: https://learningnetwork.cisco.com/s/article/comparison-between-ikev1-and-ikev2
-
ITVI 👍 1 Answered BAck and Sequences is the keyword here so B for me.
-
Rododendron2 👍 1 Answered CHas to be IKEv2 (ack is there) and ESP - so C
-
Modulator 👍 1A,C and D are Encryption protocols... so B
-
spykasgr 👍 1it is B ikev1
Reader comments & corrections
No reader corrections yet — spotted an error or have a note? Share it below.