Re: [dnsext] Source Port and QID selection for re-transmits?
Wouter Wijngaards <wouter@NLnetLabs.nl> Thu, 23 October 2008 11:04 UTC
Return-Path: <owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-dnsext-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-dnsext-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC3FF28C1BC; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 04:04:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.482
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.482 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.119, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 I1AYz8rP7oRU; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 04:04:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from psg.com (psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E98B328C1B2; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 04:04:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org>) id 1KsxuJ-000DWC-Se for namedroppers-data@psg.com; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 10:59:11 +0000
Received: from [2001:7b8:206:1::1] (helo=open.nlnetlabs.nl) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <wouter@nlnetlabs.nl>) id 1KsxuC-000DUj-IP for namedroppers@ops.ietf.org; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 10:59:07 +0000
Received: from gary.nlnetlabs.nl (gary.nlnetlabs.nl [IPv6:2001:7b8:206:1:216:76ff:feb8:1853]) (authenticated bits=0) by open.nlnetlabs.nl (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id m9NAwwrN070880 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 23 Oct 2008 12:58:59 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from wouter@nlnetlabs.nl)
Message-ID: <490058F2.5020508@nlnetlabs.nl>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 12:58:58 +0200
From: Wouter Wijngaards <wouter@NLnetLabs.nl>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080723)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk
CC: namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dnsext] Source Port and QID selection for re-transmits?
References: <OFC76E0B00.F35C649D-ON802574EB.00341AB2-802574EB.00354F1B@nominet.org.uk>
In-Reply-To: <OFC76E0B00.F35C649D-ON802574EB.00341AB2-802574EB.00354F1B@nominet.org.uk>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (open.nlnetlabs.nl [IPv6:2001:7b8:206:1::53]); Thu, 23 Oct 2008 12:58:59 +0200 (CEST)
Sender: owner-namedroppers@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <namedroppers.ops.ietf.org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Ray.Bellis@nominet.org.uk wrote: > On researching a draft I'm writing I've been unable to find any guidance > on whether the QID and Source Port of a re-transmit should be the same as > for the original request. > What are the WG's thoughts? Leave to implementation. Lengthening the time the packet is accepted is one choice. Choosing new ID, port (and no longer accepting the old one) is another choice. You could caution against birthday attacks, but please do not prescribe implementation. Best regards, Wouter -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkkAWPIACgkQkDLqNwOhpPgiEQCfdPrn5iPx1osvAKE7DsTnYxA3 6J4AoK/YPt6a4x7W/1/s36rL9sLHbtdt =Ax8n -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- to unsubscribe send a message to namedroppers-request@ops.ietf.org with the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/namedroppers/>
- [dnsext] Source Port and QID selection for re-tra… Ray.Bellis
- Re: [dnsext] Source Port and QID selection for re… Wouter Wijngaards
- Re: [dnsext] Source Port and QID selection for re… Nicholas Weaver
- Re: [dnsext] Source Port and QID selection for re… George Barwood