IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [CGA-EXT] Hashed DAD

Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com> Thu, 28 February 2008 23:07 UTC

Return-Path: <cga-ext-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-cga-ext-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-cga-ext-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DC8D28C257; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:07:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.407
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.407 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.970, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
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 4K-55vrAWNKr; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:07:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA60B28C0D9; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:07:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: cga-ext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cga-ext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E3F828C140 for <cga-ext@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:07:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
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 OpvnR9RH9NLF for <cga-ext@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:06:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from imr1.ericy.com (imr1.ericy.com [198.24.6.9]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2821C3A6BC7 for <cga-ext@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:06:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from eusrcmw751.eamcs.ericsson.se (eusrcmw751.exu.ericsson.se [138.85.77.51]) by imr1.ericy.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m1SN6oJp000543; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 17:06:50 -0600
Received: from eusrcmw751.eamcs.ericsson.se ([138.85.77.56]) by eusrcmw751.eamcs.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 28 Feb 2008 17:06:50 -0600
Received: from [142.133.10.140] ([142.133.10.140]) by eusrcmw751.eamcs.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 28 Feb 2008 17:06:50 -0600
Message-ID: <47C73E7A.2040904@ericsson.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 18:06:34 -0500
From: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Pars Mutaf <pars.mutaf@gmail.com>
References: <18a603a60802281139x220a6227j24d9b0234c65b71b@mail.gmail.com> <47C72E84.9010000@ericsson.com> <18a603a60802281459v74339060tba68afa657ad3052@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <18a603a60802281459v74339060tba68afa657ad3052@mail.gmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Feb 2008 23:06:50.0145 (UTC) FILETIME=[9988C110:01C87A5E]
Cc: cga-ext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [CGA-EXT] Hashed DAD
X-BeenThere: cga-ext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: CGA and SeND Extensions <cga-ext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cga-ext>, <mailto:cga-ext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/cga-ext>
List-Post: <mailto:cga-ext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cga-ext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cga-ext>, <mailto:cga-ext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: cga-ext-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: cga-ext-bounces@ietf.org

Hi Pars,

Pars Mutaf wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 10:58 PM, Suresh Krishnan
> <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com> wrote:
>> Hi Pars,
>>    There are not much details to go on, but I can already see that there
>>  are a couple of issues with this approach.
>>
>>  * It works only if ALL NODES in the network support your upgraded
>>  specification, since if there is even one unupgraded node it will
>>  destroy your scheme. This makes this proposal a non-starter.
> 
> At first look, I would say if an unupgraded node configured
> the address hash(X), it would defend the address hash(X).
> The DADing node can discard it because it wants the address X  ?

   An unupgraded node wants to configure address X. An upgraded node 
(that has already configured X on one if its interfaces) receives this 
packet. It creates Hash(X) and compares it to the address sent by A 
(i.e. X) and does not find a match. Hence it does not defend its address.

Cheers
Suresh
_______________________________________________
CGA-EXT mailing list
CGA-EXT@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cga-ext

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email