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

Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams@sun.com> Wed, 09 April 2008 16:13 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 ACCE23A6DAD for <ietfarch-btns-archive-waDah9Oh@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Apr 2008 09:13:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.435
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.435 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.164, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 oNueNizDSWEV for <ietfarch-btns-archive-waDah9Oh@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Apr 2008 09:13:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from boreas.isi.edu (boreas.isi.edu [128.9.160.161]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC4593A6D18 for <btns-archive-waDah9Oh@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Apr 2008 09:13:08 -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 m39FpmhI017793; Wed, 9 Apr 2008 08:51:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sca-ea-mail-4.sun.com (sca-ea-mail-4.Sun.COM [192.18.43.22]) by boreas.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m39Fpef8017749 for <anonsec@postel.org>; Wed, 9 Apr 2008 08:51:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dm-central-01.central.sun.com ([129.147.62.4]) by sca-ea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id m39Fpeva015326 for <anonsec@postel.org>; Wed, 9 Apr 2008 15:51:40 GMT
Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM (binky.Central.Sun.COM [129.153.128.104]) by dm-central-01.central.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL, v2.2) with ESMTP id m39Fpdog062387 for <anonsec@postel.org>; Wed, 9 Apr 2008 09:51:39 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from binky.Central.Sun.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m39Fpd30006748; Wed, 9 Apr 2008 10:51:39 -0500 (CDT)
Received: (from nw141292@localhost) by binky.Central.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id m39Fpdnv006747; Wed, 9 Apr 2008 10:51:39 -0500 (CDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: binky.Central.Sun.COM: nw141292 set sender to Nicolas.Williams@sun.com using -f
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 10:51:39 -0500
From: Nicolas Williams <Nicolas.Williams@sun.com>
To: Daniel Migault <daniel.migault@orange-ftgroup.com>
Message-ID: <20080409155138.GC16998@Sun.COM>
Mail-Followup-To: Daniel Migault <daniel.migault@orange-ftgroup.com>, Daniel Migault <mglt.biz@gmail.com>, anonsec@postel.org
References: <20080225093002.01ABB3A6CB2@core3.amsl.com> <c17ec2f80803132253k6442ec40m99be1872704f5c5a@mail.gmail.com> <20080407180003.GB16998@Sun.COM> <20080408173036.GS16998@Sun.COM> <47FCD94F.6040108@orange-ftgroup.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <47FCD94F.6040108@orange-ftgroup.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.7i
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: nicolas.williams@sun.com
Cc: anonsec@postel.org
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: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: anonsec-bounces@postel.org
Errors-To: anonsec-bounces@postel.org

On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 04:57:19PM +0200, Daniel Migault wrote:
> >Never mind.  I've written one:
> >
> Here are my comments they might result from mis-interpretation of the 
> draft, but that how I understood it.
> 
> On the figure there is a transition from LISTEN to ESTABLISH state. I 
> might be wrong but I understood LISTEN state as an established state for 
> Listener connection Latch.  So I  would  not expect transition from 
> LISTEN to ESTABLISHED state. The only transition would be from LISTEN to 
> CLOSE state.

I didn't know how to draw this, but yes, LISTEN *spawns* ESTABLISHED
latches.  I thinkI'll just add text to the diagram, or use a different
style of line.

_______________________________________________