Re: [Ieprep] Diffserv Code Point for Emergency calls

"James M. Polk" <jmpolk@cisco.com> Sat, 22 October 2005 06:02 UTC

Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1ETCSM-0006it-N9; Sat, 22 Oct 2005 02:02:14 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1ETCSK-0006fE-Mm for ieprep@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 22 Oct 2005 02:02:12 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA20013 for <ieprep@ietf.org>; Sat, 22 Oct 2005 02:02:02 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com ([171.71.176.71] helo=sj-iport-2.cisco.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ETCeb-0000sW-Qp for ieprep@ietf.org; Sat, 22 Oct 2005 02:14:55 -0400
Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com ([171.71.177.254]) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 21 Oct 2005 23:02:03 -0700
Received: from xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-221.cisco.com [128.107.191.63]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id j9M61xJh024990; Fri, 21 Oct 2005 23:02:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from xfe-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.174]) by xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Fri, 21 Oct 2005 23:01:59 -0700
Received: from jmpolk-wxp.cisco.com ([10.21.98.53]) by xfe-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Fri, 21 Oct 2005 23:01:58 -0700
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20051022005642.0374ca50@email.cisco.com>
X-Sender: jmpolk@email.cisco.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 01:01:57 -0500
To: "Reinaldo Penno" <rpenno@juniper.net>
From: "James M. Polk" <jmpolk@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [Ieprep] Diffserv Code Point for Emergency calls
In-Reply-To: <A89EB72D-7A4E-48D1-886D-DB2964B29453@g11.org.uk>
References: <9BD5D7887235424FA97DFC223CAE3C2801667701@proton.jnpr.net> <9BD5D7887235424FA97DFC223CAE3C2801667701@proton.jnpr.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Oct 2005 06:01:58.0795 (UTC) FILETIME=[1CFE1DB0:01C5D6CE]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 8b431ad66d60be2d47c7bfeb879db82c
Cc: ieprep@ietf.org, ken carlberg <carlberg@g11.org.uk>
X-BeenThere: ieprep@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internet Emergency Preparedness Working Group <ieprep.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep>, <mailto:ieprep-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ieprep@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ieprep-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep>, <mailto:ieprep-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ieprep-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ieprep-bounces@ietf.org

Reinaldo

Adding fuel to a discussion that has churned on many lists over the last 
several years, I'd really want to understand the threat anaylsis observed 
by such a proposal (for a emergency DSCP) to ensure it could not be used 
for a fairly trivial to generate DDOS on the network - even all the way to 
the PSAP, or just used by neighbors wanting the very best throughput for 
their game of Doom.

At 10:57 AM 10/21/2005 -0400, ken carlberg wrote:
>Hello Reinaldo,
>
>>I read
>>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ieprep-framework-10.txt
>>and was somewhat puzzled at section 4.1.2. I understand that the IETF
>>wants to be conservative in standardizing new DSCP, but it seems to an
>>emergency call DSCP would be accepted by the community (am I wrong?).
>
>well, from my own take, I would say that the "community" is not
>against an emergency call DSCP per se, but rather awaits specific
>proposals with a cautious mindset.  Recall from that section 4.1.2
>that there is a need to define a behavior in addition to identifying
>a code point.  So if you want a code point of 1 or more bits for
>"emergency", what would be its defined forwarding behavior?
>
>one such proposal, primarily aimed at MLPP, is called Multi-Level
>Expedited Forwarding (MLEF) and can be found at:
>ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/internet-drafts/draft-silverman- 
>tsvwg-mlefphb-03.txt
>
>I would also suggest reading a counter proposal that avoids defining
>a new DSCP:
>ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tsvwg- 
>mlpp-that-works-02.txt
>you can dig around the TSVWG archives over the past 2 months for some
>comments on the draft.
>
>-ken
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Ieprep mailing list
>Ieprep@ietf.org
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ieprep


cheers,
James

                                 *******************
                 Truth is not to be argued... it is to be presented.

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