IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [anonsec] I-D Action:draft-ietf-btns-connection-latching-06.txt

"Daniel Migault" <mglt.biz@gmail.com> Thu, 10 April 2008 14:43 UTC

Return-Path: <anonsec-bounces@postel.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-btns-archive-waDah9Oh@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-btns-archive-waDah9Oh@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C0E228C4FA for <ietfarch-btns-archive-waDah9Oh@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Apr 2008 07:43:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 2pfwK4dJhgwP for <ietfarch-btns-archive-waDah9Oh@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 10 Apr 2008 07:43:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from boreas.isi.edu (boreas.isi.edu [128.9.160.161]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2B203A6B2A for <btns-archive-waDah9Oh@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 10 Apr 2008 07:43:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from boreas.isi.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by boreas.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m3AENS5P018947; Thu, 10 Apr 2008 07:23:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (py-out-1112.google.com [64.233.166.182]) by boreas.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m3AEM6nx018262 for <anonsec@postel.org>; Thu, 10 Apr 2008 07:22:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id a77so9752pyh.35 for <anonsec@postel.org>; Thu, 10 Apr 2008 07:22:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=pfnEqWMnzNm0eA7NePofBmGJYi2KRw+4rXVbUXj1+Yo=; b=jw4HdOup2Q+3EorGoeovfOvguc47NeZjBKaFPzoIj64zbPz1+Bgx+OOS6cKJM7lfGDVQ9IQJh9So8VPFkNy0UP2doQUdI5jf3C6nkYV62mdOOfsUAC5Bk7gnz9PBISwGkingDuArDMU6BeTY5Mw0W/+96/7C0ZZQ+OnI+Gk5vWw=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=OpyWz4okW+toF5GdokufSpglMq5QEHnlTEJFWv6iGP1sNxzHKpU7XG6hvZ+hrc4QDylrr3o9KKulCf6hoNkN69/l7WRl7Wk7DcyVKs5t8C3C1bENvS4BXIUWmkwe0XFu8qpQQNI4AOfJi3tpaLhXuazLT94EfFR81NGW7Es0KD4=
Received: by 10.141.172.6 with SMTP id z6mr771799rvo.136.1207837322338; Thu, 10 Apr 2008 07:22:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.141.78.19 with HTTP; Thu, 10 Apr 2008 07:22:02 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <c17ec2f80804100722l1104b370vd55d91ee5792039d@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 16:22:02 +0200
From: Daniel Migault <mglt.biz@gmail.com>
To: Daniel Migault <daniel.migault@orange-ftgroup.com>, Daniel Migault <mglt.biz@gmail.com>, anonsec@postel.org
In-Reply-To: <20080410042555.GF8027@Sun.COM>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20080225093002.01ABB3A6CB2@core3.amsl.com> <20080407180003.GB16998@Sun.COM> <20080408173036.GS16998@Sun.COM> <47FCD94F.6040108@orange-ftgroup.com> <20080409155138.GC16998@Sun.COM> <20080409170021.GE16998@Sun.COM> <47FCFFEA.7020004@orange-ftgroup.com> <20080409173633.GF16998@Sun.COM> <20080409181238.GG16998@Sun.COM> <20080410042555.GF8027@Sun.COM>
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: mglt.biz@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [anonsec] I-D Action:draft-ietf-btns-connection-latching-06.txt
X-BeenThere: anonsec@postel.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.6
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussions of anonymous Internet security." <anonsec.postel.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/anonsec>, <mailto:anonsec-request@postel.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mailman.postel.org/pipermail/anonsec>
List-Post: <mailto:anonsec@postel.org>
List-Help: <mailto:anonsec-request@postel.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/anonsec>, <mailto:anonsec-request@postel.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1872064858=="
Sender: anonsec-bounces@postel.org
Errors-To: anonsec-bounces@postel.org

On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 6:25 AM, Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams@sun.com>
wrote:

> Thinking it over, the SUSPENDED and BROKEN states differ only in whether
> an implementation supports transitioning from SUSPENDED to ESTABLISHED.
>

I personally like the idea of the SUSPEND state which is the state where
problems have to be solved, as opposed to the ESTABLISHED state where
Latched objects are running properly.
Maybe there is a solution to drop the  SUSPEND state and merge it with the
BROKEN state by  considering different transition condition from ESTABLISHED
to BROKEN.

I don't think we have too many states, and I eventually would add  CONECTION
larval state for LC objects. On the other hand, if I really had to drop one
state I would rather drop larval state like the LISTEN state.


>
> That difference is too small to warrant two states.
>
> So I'm going to merge those two states.  That will make the state
> diagram simpler.
>

> Nico
> --


Daniel



-- 
Daniel Migault
Orange Labs / Security Lab
+33 (0) 1 45 29 60 52
+33 (0) 6 70 72 69 58

_______________________________________________

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email