Re: replay field size straw poll

Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com> Thu, 13 February 1997 03:59 UTC

Received: (from majordom@localhost) by portal.ex.tis.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) id WAA01852 for ipsec-outgoing; Wed, 12 Feb 1997 22:59:49 -0500 (EST)
X-Sender: kent@po1.bbn.com
Message-Id: <v03007801af283b28266e@[128.33.229.246]>
In-Reply-To: <199702112214.RAA09176@smb.research.att.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 22:31:58 -0500
To: "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@research.att.com>
From: Stephen Kent <kent@bbn.com>
Subject: Re: replay field size straw poll
Cc: ipsec@tis.com
Sender: owner-ipsec@ex.tis.com
Precedence: bulk

Steve,

	This is a sort of sliding window counter, in that one accepts
potentially old messages within a negotiated window and matches the
sequence number against the log of received messages within that window.  I
agree that this is different from TCP window arithmetic, but it still
strikes me as sufficiently complex as to be a likely source of bugs, at
least initially.

Steve