Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ?
Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> Thu, 18 February 2016 20:15 UTC
Return-Path: <marka@isc.org>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 249571B3549 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Feb 2016 12:15:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.907
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.907 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.006, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Lcz-mwFsQKeI for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Feb 2016 12:15:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.pao1.isc.org (mx.pao1.isc.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:0:2::2b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8EBC1B3544 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Feb 2016 12:15:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from zmx1.isc.org (zmx1.isc.org [149.20.0.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx.pao1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E50923494EC; Thu, 18 Feb 2016 20:15:21 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from zmx1.isc.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zmx1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB97E16008D; Thu, 18 Feb 2016 20:15:21 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zmx1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEA6E16008C; Thu, 18 Feb 2016 20:15:21 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from zmx1.isc.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zmx1.isc.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id g7Aoqr7wHy1q; Thu, 18 Feb 2016 20:15:21 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from rock.dv.isc.org (c110-21-49-25.carlnfd1.nsw.optusnet.com.au [110.21.49.25]) by zmx1.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8CA12160045; Thu, 18 Feb 2016 20:15:21 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from rock.dv.isc.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rock.dv.isc.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4F1242AA405; Fri, 19 Feb 2016 07:15:19 +1100 (EST)
To: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
From: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
References: <CAOJ6w=EvzE3dM4Y2mFFR=9YyPBdmFu_jkF4-42LjkdbRd3yz_w@mail.gmail.com> <20160208200943.A615941B5B96@rock.dv.isc.org> <CAMm+LwgLoYpQ1TNOTOuJzh+cu+GyRBf9=y_K7K35boQ9WcZKjA@mail.gmail.com> <56B92A96.9050200@si6networks.com> <CAMm+LwifTXvVd1mPZOfcOOR03Fnj-82H9aDVS01=wGezePtnXw@mail.gmail.com> <56BA4BC7.1010002@isi.edu> <CAMm+Lwi-n=be4AWGibs+Zq9egYw5pSDmPGb-4P0LDEcX1E6osA@mail.gmail.com> <56BA68CE.7090304@isi.edu> <CAMm+LwiM2sFUeejgJZe650UQbVHrh7EHrEF2omvPrZJPodgJLA@mail.gmail.com> <56BA739D.7060309@isi.edu> <CAMm+Lwij1dOkK0b2ZnJiPMtba=wc823WgYjqw0iwAApa3KBYcg@mail.gmail.com> <56BA95C7.8060109@isi.edu> <56BAD6CC.2030209@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <56BBAAF7.6020903@isi.edu> <56BC9516.6050305@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <56BCCBB4.4050909@isi.edu> <56BCF514.6040401@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <56BE23F0.4090403@isi.edu> <56BFD7B3.9080505@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <56C14D50.4040802@isi.edu> <56C21C4B.50304@gmail.com> <56C42A84.1040207@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <56C5808C.1090906@ necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Subject: Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ?
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 18 Feb 2016 17:27:56 +0900." <56C5808C.1090906@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 07:15:19 +1100
Message-Id: <20160218201519.D4F1242AA405@rock.dv.isc.org>
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/-0pcswRGl8ckuUueaRLI8eDhw2k>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 20:15:30 -0000
In message <56C5808C.1090906@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>, Masataka Ohta writes: > Masataka Ohta (I) wrote: > > > The RFC is a complete mess, in various ways. It says flow IDs are > > good because it is random, but, at the same time, it says flow > > IDs may not be random. > > I found the rfc is even worse. > > The most important thing the rfc must have stated (it > does not, of course) is: > > (SRC1, DST1, flow_ID1) > > of a stateful flow MUST be unique (not used by packets > not belonging to the flow) within the Internet, > which can be guaranteed only by an end (source or > destination), which is a straight forward manifestation > of the end to end argument. > > But, the rfc allow routers (firewalls) change flow IDs to > nonzero value. > > So, if a router changes flow ID of (SRC1, DST1, flow_ID2), > from flow_ID2 to flow_ID3, then, there is a possibility > that flow_ID1==flow_ID3, which is fatal for the stateful > flow, if the modified packets are merged to the stateful > flow (certain protection against merging possible but > not robust against route changes). > > Of course, section 6.1 of the rfc on covert channels is > abstract nonsense, because covert channels may be created > in various ways to carry information, for example, with > extension headers (fragmentation boundaries, for example, > can be arbitrary), which means firewalls should reject > packets with extension headers. No, it doesn't. Firewalls have a purpose. Most of the time the purpose isn't to block communication. It is to block wasting resources or to try to prevent poorly written applications / ip stacks being compromised. Often people forget that firewalls need to let packets though that are part of a legitimate communications flow through. You don't actually need to stop *every* potential packet that isn't part of a communications flow. You just need to make it hard enough that it is not worth the effort to find the open paths if you are not part of a legitimate flow. > Masataka Ohta -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? John Levine
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Yoav Nir
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Alexey Eromenko
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Yoav Nir
- Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Alexey Eromenko
- RE: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Templin, Fred L
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Joe Touch
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Alexey Eromenko
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? David Borman
- RE: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Ronald Bonica
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Warren Kumari
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? David Borman
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Mark Andrews
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Mark Andrews
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Joe Touch
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Joe Touch
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Joe Touch
- RE: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Ronald Bonica
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Joe Touch
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Carsten Bormann
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Theodore V Faber
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Ted Hardie
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Fernando Gont
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Fernando Gont
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Fernando Gont
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Fernando Gont
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Warren Kumari
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Fernando Gont
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Masataka Ohta
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Yoav Nir
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Masataka Ohta
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Harald Alvestrand
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Tony Finch
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Warren Kumari
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Harald Alvestrand
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Joe Touch
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Joe Touch
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Joe Touch
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Doug Royer
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Joe Touch
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Not EUI-64 [was Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer … Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Fernando Gont
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Fernando Gont
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Fernando Gont
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Fernando Gont
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? joel jaeggli
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Joe Touch
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Fernando Gont
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Masataka Ohta
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Masataka Ohta
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Fernando Gont
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Masataka Ohta
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Fernando Gont
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Masataka Ohta
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Joe Touch
- RE: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Templin, Fred L
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Alexey Eromenko
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Masataka Ohta
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Joe Touch
- RE: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Templin, Fred L
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Joe Touch
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Joe Touch
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Masataka Ohta
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Mark Andrews
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Masataka Ohta
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Mark Andrews
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Masataka Ohta
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Joe Touch
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Warren Kumari
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Joe Touch
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Masataka Ohta
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Joe Touch
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Masataka Ohta
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Masataka Ohta
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Masataka Ohta
- Re: Is Fragmentation at IP layer even needed ? Mark Andrews