Re: [dtn-security] Including fragment offset in the correlator doesn't prevent all fragment collisions.

Amy,

I do not believe RFC5050 was designed with secure reactive fragmentation in
mind.  RFC5050 is fine for research.  Hopefully we are learning a lot and
will fix what doesn't work very well on a second or third iteration.

-- Will 

> From: Peter Lovell <plovell@mac.com>
> Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 20:11:14 -0500
> To: Amy Alford <aloomis@sarn.org>, dtn-security <dtn-security@irtf.org>
> Subject: Re: [dtn-security] Including fragment offset in the correlator
> doesn't prevent all fragment collisions.
> 
> Amy Alford <aloomis@sarn.org> wrote:
> 
>> A bundle can be fragmented multiple times independently, so a node may
>> receive multiple fragments with the same offset and length that have
>> traveled different paths (and accumulated different BSP blocks along the
>> way).  Collisions in the correlator values once the bundle is reassembled
>> are inevitable.
>> - Amy
> 
> Hi Amy,
> 
> my thought is that we have covered the problem of multiple-fragmentation and
> multi-path, but perhaps not.
> 
> Can you describe a bundle scenario that exemplifies the issue you see, so we
> can think about it.
> 
> Thanks.....Peter
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dtn-security mailing list
> dtn-security@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn-security