Re: [Anima] chain of redirections for Cloud Registrar

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Mon, 14 June 2021 17:26 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B38E83A2BA0 for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Jun 2021 10:26:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zhaSIhNPtL3s for <anima@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Jun 2021 10:26:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [176.58.120.209]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 337673A2B9F for <anima@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Jun 2021 10:26:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dooku.sandelman.ca (unknown [142.169.78.190]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4095C1F456; Mon, 14 Jun 2021 17:26:02 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by dooku.sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id CBC761A293E; Mon, 14 Jun 2021 13:26:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
cc: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, max pritikin <pritikin@cisco.com>, anima@ietf.org
In-reply-to: <20210614160942.GB28552@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
References: <6572.1623550948@localhost> <B2AB9C25-FA39-43F2-A768-3B7544518B9D@tzi.org> <20210614160942.GB28552@faui48e.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
Comments: In-reply-to Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> message dated "Mon, 14 Jun 2021 18:09:42 +0200."
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7.1; GNU Emacs 26.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2021 13:26:00 -0400
Message-ID: <80150.1623691560@dooku>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/4U79HjfaYTQ41SZEfBd_ZcOJSf8>
Subject: Re: [Anima] chain of redirections for Cloud Registrar
X-BeenThere: anima@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach <anima.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/anima/>
List-Post: <mailto:anima@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2021 17:26:10 -0000

Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> wrote:
    > I think multiple redirects can make a lot of sense, as Mcr said for
    > resale chains for example.  I wouldn't be too bothered with DoS attacks
    > an attepting to come up with a tiny number.  I'd rather go with a
    > number larger than what i can think of being useful. 10 for example.  I
    > could build a load-sharing ring with that ("I am busy, try next") of
    > reasonable size.

I agree: a limit of 2-3 is silly. O(10) is correct.
O(100) is excessive.

    > I my pet topic of course is diagnostics of non-malicious misconfigs.

    > So, when a pledge is redirected from
    > https://domain3.com/.well-known/brski/requestvoucher
    > https://domain4.com/.well-known/brski/requestvoucher

    > Could we make the pledge actually do the get with a breadcrump trail:

    >  On https://domain4.com connection: GET
    > /.well-known/brski/requestvoucher?brskiredirpath=domain3.com,domain2.com,domain.com

Doesn't the HTTP header Referrer include this kind of thing?
Or if not, is there another header?

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-