IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Hipsec] some comments for mm-03: including ESP-INFO in all (relevant) UPDATES

Pekka Nikander <pekka.nikander@nomadiclab.com> Mon, 10 April 2006 09:49 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FSt1U-0000Dj-Sk; Mon, 10 Apr 2006 05:49:28 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FSt1T-0000De-O8 for hipsec@ietf.org; Mon, 10 Apr 2006 05:49:27 -0400
Received: from n2.nomadiclab.com ([193.234.219.2]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FSt1S-0000yC-Eh for hipsec@ietf.org; Mon, 10 Apr 2006 05:49:27 -0400
Received: from n2.nomadiclab.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by n2.nomadiclab.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDDC6212C63; Mon, 10 Apr 2006 12:49:24 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by n2.nomadiclab.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81CB2212C5F; Mon, 10 Apr 2006 12:49:24 +0300 (EEST)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0604101220070.26662@kekkonen.cs.hut.fi>
References: <77F357662F8BFA4CA7074B0410171B6D01A2EFB1@XCH-NW-5V1.nw.nos.boeing.com> <Pine.GSO.4.58.0604081428130.17314@kekkonen.cs.hut.fi> <2D12A2F5-80F5-42D9-AA54-289B62F3EC3D@nomadiclab.com> <Pine.GSO.4.58.0604101220070.26662@kekkonen.cs.hut.fi>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v746.3)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; delsp="yes"; format="flowed"
Message-Id: <93B5DE1A-E74F-4D57-9FED-4ABB5FB1E7CF@nomadiclab.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Pekka Nikander <pekka.nikander@nomadiclab.com>
Subject: Re: [Hipsec] some comments for mm-03: including ESP-INFO in all (relevant) UPDATES
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 12:49:24 +0300
To: Miika Komu <miika@iki.fi>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.746.3)
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: cf4fa59384e76e63313391b70cd0dd25
Cc: hipsec@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: hipsec@lists.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the official IETF Mailing List for the HIP Working Group." <hipsec.lists.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/hipsec>
List-Post: <mailto:hipsec@lists.ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hipsec-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec>, <mailto:hipsec-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: hipsec-bounces@lists.ietf.org

> My point was to reduce the number of indexing mechanisms required  
> in the
> implementations. When you receive an UPDATE packet containing an ECHO
> RESPONSE but without ESP_INFO, you need yet another index (the  
> UPDATE ID)
> to map the packet to the corresponding SA. However, if we had the the
> ESP_INFO included, we'd find the SA just with the existing SPI search
> mechanisms that are already required for base exchange.

How come?  Why don't you just include the necessary info in you  
ECHO_REQUEST?  You can even include a direct memory pointer if you  
dare (but I wouldn't do that... :-)  You are free to include any  
information you want there, aren't you?

--Pekka


_______________________________________________
Hipsec mailing list
Hipsec@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hipsec

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email