IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] Lifetime draft: refresh time should never be more than IRT_DEFAULT

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Tue, 09 November 2004 16:42 UTC

Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA17782; Tue, 9 Nov 2004 11:42:00 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CRYxn-0001az-Ru; Tue, 09 Nov 2004 11:35:23 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CRYms-0008Jz-AG for dhcwg@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 09 Nov 2004 11:24:06 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA15866 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Nov 2004 11:24:03 -0500 (EST)
Received: from shell-ng.nominum.com ([81.200.64.181]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CRYne-00080z-BC for dhcwg@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Nov 2004 11:24:54 -0500
Received: from [130.129.132.183] (unknown [130.129.132.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by shell-ng.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47A8256889; Tue, 9 Nov 2004 08:22:56 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Ted.Lemon@nominum.com)
In-Reply-To: <20041109151735.GH15501@sverresborg.uninett.no>
References: <E0AD8372-3255-11D9-AA52-000A95D6A618@nominum.com> <20041109151735.GH15501@sverresborg.uninett.no>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Message-Id: <97FEEA2C-326B-11D9-AA52-000A95D6A618@nominum.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Lifetime draft: refresh time should never be more than IRT_DEFAULT
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 11:22:47 -0500
To: Stig Venaas <Stig.Venaas@uninett.no>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.619)
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7a6398bf8aaeabc7a7bb696b6b0a2aad
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: dhcwg.ietf.org
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Nov 9, 2004, at 10:17 AM, Stig Venaas wrote:
> I understand your concern, but I don't see why it should be disallowed.
> The administrator should be able to figure out what's reasonable in
> hers/his environment.
>
> To use the DNS ttl analogy, there's nothing stopping you from setting
> a needlessly large ttl value either.

It's a really phat DoS attack - you send out one bogus message with a 
really long lifetime, and the information will never be refreshed.   I 
would argue that DNS needs to have a limit on TTLs also, but that's not 
my bailiwick.   :')


_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

v2.30.2 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status