IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Hipsec] Selection of LSI address block

Miika Komu <miika.komu@hiit.fi> Thu, 20 August 2009 06:43 UTC

Return-Path: <miika.komu@hiit.fi>
X-Original-To: hipsec@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hipsec@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDF1E3A6AB8 for <hipsec@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Aug 2009 23:43:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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 II9bxRrIXxoq for <hipsec@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Aug 2009 23:43:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from argo.otaverkko.fi (argo.otaverkko.fi [212.68.0.2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFBA73A6850 for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Aug 2009 23:43:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.2] (cs27101111.pp.htv.fi [89.27.101.111]) by argo.otaverkko.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68D4425ED12 for <hipsec@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Aug 2009 09:43:48 +0300 (EEST)
Message-ID: <4A8CF111.5010901@hiit.fi>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 09:45:37 +0300
From: Miika Komu <miika.komu@hiit.fi>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090608)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: hipsec@ietf.org
References: <4A8C708D.4010503@htt-consult.com> <0DF156EE7414494187B087A3C279BDB404AD7C6A@XCH-NW-6V1.nw.nos.boeing.com>
In-Reply-To: <0DF156EE7414494187B087A3C279BDB404AD7C6A@XCH-NW-6V1.nw.nos.boeing.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Hipsec] Selection of LSI address block
X-BeenThere: hipsec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: miika.komu@hiit.fi
List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." <hipsec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hipsec>
List-Post: <mailto:hipsec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 06:43:46 -0000

Ahrenholz, Jeffrey M wrote:

Hi,

>> We have discussed using 127.0.0.0 for LSIs, say 
>> 127.100.0.0/16, but will 
>> that really work?
> 
> in the OpenHIP software we have a macro IN_LOOP() to check if an IPv4
> address is equal to 
> (INADDR_LOOPBACK >> IN_CLASSA_NSHIFT), i.e. if the top bits equal 127
> (see /usr/include/netinet/in.h on Linux)
> 
> I wonder if other applications use similar techniques to check for
> loopback addresses? Using 127.100.0.0/16 would be problematic in that
> case.

many apps probably (?) just check 127.0.0.0/8 which could be a big 
problem for HIP. I would prefer getting a slot from 1.0.0.0/x address 
space to avoid such problems. We have been experimenting with the 
1.0.0.0/x address space without any problems.

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