Re: [BEHAVE] draft-chen-behave-rsnat-01
Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com> Wed, 29 July 2009 14:58 UTC
Return-Path: <iljitsch@muada.com>
X-Original-To: behave@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: behave@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E364F3A6F83 for <behave@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:58:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.601, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2YDBRvhY4q-U for <behave@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:58:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sequoia.muada.com (sequoia.muada.com [83.149.65.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 096813A67F4 for <behave@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 07:57:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.43.1.106] ([77.241.97.116]) (authenticated bits=0) by sequoia.muada.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id n6TEvexB086672 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 29 Jul 2009 16:57:41 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from iljitsch@muada.com)
Message-Id: <DA369C62-C993-47CE-A2DC-0226F51AE01A@muada.com>
From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>
To: Chen Gang <phdgang@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <36ba02b00907290715o181671e7odaadfe1c9bddf586@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"; delsp="yes"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v935.3)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 16:57:51 +0200
References: <2A75F3F1-B253-4525-9082-5FF2A4CFFF6D@muada.com> <36ba02b00907280708l7bd61c7bhf51773b059d51286@mail.gmail.com> <7EF301E8-5F6A-4EDC-98BF-CCFFEF0937CD@muada.com> <36ba02b00907290715o181671e7odaadfe1c9bddf586@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.935.3)
Cc: Behave WG <behave@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] draft-chen-behave-rsnat-01
X-BeenThere: behave@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: mailing list of BEHAVE IETF WG <behave.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/behave>
List-Post: <mailto:behave@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave>, <mailto:behave-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 14:58:01 -0000
On 29 jul 2009, at 16:15, Chen Gang wrote: > => For avoiding information leaks, how about define new capability > attribute? The leaking would happen by a router that has the capability towards a router that presumably doesn't have the capability, the capability mechanism doesn't protect against that on its own. > Could you provide more detailed explanations for defining a new > address family? Have a look at RFC 2547, especially section 4.1.
- [BEHAVE] draft-chen-behave-rsnat-01 Iljitsch van Beijnum
- Re: [BEHAVE] draft-chen-behave-rsnat-01 Chen Gang
- Re: [BEHAVE] draft-chen-behave-rsnat-01 Iljitsch van Beijnum
- Re: [BEHAVE] draft-chen-behave-rsnat-01 Chen Gang
- Re: [BEHAVE] draft-chen-behave-rsnat-01 Iljitsch van Beijnum