IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: Consensus call on adopting <draft-krishnan-6man-rs-mark-08.txt>

"Laganier, Julien" <julienl@qualcomm.com> Mon, 25 October 2010 15:31 UTC

Return-Path: <julienl@qualcomm.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 045473A6AA3 for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Oct 2010 08:31:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -107.52
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-107.52 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.079, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 beryqxJcOzlr for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Oct 2010 08:30:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wolverine02.qualcomm.com (wolverine02.qualcomm.com [199.106.114.251]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1037E3A6A90 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Oct 2010 08:30:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=qualcomm.com; i=julienl@qualcomm.com; q=dns/txt; s=qcdkim; t=1288020759; x=1319556759; h=from:to:cc:date:subject:thread-topic:thread-index: message-id:references:in-reply-to:accept-language: content-language:x-ms-has-attach:x-ms-tnef-correlator: acceptlanguage:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; z=From:=20"Laganier,=20Julien"=20<julienl@qualcomm.com> |To:=20Philip=20Homburg=20<pch-6man@u-1.phicoh.com>|CC: =20IPv6=20WG=20Mailing=20List=20<ipv6@ietf.org>,=20Suresh =20Krishnan=0D=0A=09<suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>|Date: =20Mon,=2025=20Oct=202010=2008:30:37=20-0700|Subject:=20R E:=20Consensus=20call=20on=20adopting=20<draft-krishnan-6 man-rs-mark-08.txt>=20|Thread-Topic:=20Consensus=20call =20on=20adopting=0D=0A=20<draft-krishnan-6man-rs-mark-08. txt>=20|Thread-Index:=20ActyjkzGCcfNuu2bT3SAt6Ei1ihM1gByg zBg|Message-ID:=20<BF345F63074F8040B58C00A186FCA57F29F6C3 6D97@NALASEXMB04.na.qualcomm.com>|References:=20<3F7E0126 -76FB-43BA-B25F-1EE226FA73AA@gmail.com>=0D=0A=09<79ECC38B -B7AD-47B1-B6A4-E0B4F75B91F1@gmail.com>=0D=0A=09<m21v7icp 8p.wl%randy@psg.com>=09<m1P9IGH-0001fnC@stereo.hq.phicoh. net>=0D=0A=09<4CC19ACF.5070706@ericsson.com>=09<m1P9IZF-0 001gMC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>=0D=0A=09<4CC1A3A5.9040209@er icsson.com>=09<m1P9J7Y-0001VwC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>=0D =0A=09<4CC1A846.4030605@ericsson.com>=09<m1P9KDC-0001iFC@ stereo.hq.phicoh.net>=0D=0A=09<BF345F63074F8040B58C00A186 FCA57F29F6C36D06@NALASEXMB04.na.qualcomm.com>=0D=0A=20<m1 P9ZgA-0001fnC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>|In-Reply-To:=20<m1P9Z gA-0001fnC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>|Accept-Language:=20en-US |Content-Language:=20en-US|X-MS-Has-Attach: |X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:|acceptlanguage:=20en-US |Content-Type:=20text/plain=3B=20charset=3D"us-ascii" |Content-Transfer-Encoding:=20quoted-printable |MIME-Version:=201.0; bh=piqO6vwz4//gyG4fkhQUTq4RVjay5o6KgbaHDC4tXoo=; b=RP0NG58/P6ZkGy7T5gOe5NmvoDZm29MywblFVDe0qgKuS3C9btb5FGly qGZi07W67KnI5ROkGpLeEzniuH+ffKDdTlbCUvB6wNNSgl8ieZoLMojWq 4r6lyhXFe5euG//Mqm8GZpz+2Kh0DrZEGjP+TTmZkC0LWRLWBpqfT+OVe 0=;
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,6146"; a="59149280"
Received: from ironmsg02-r.qualcomm.com ([172.30.46.16]) by wolverine02.qualcomm.com with ESMTP; 25 Oct 2010 08:32:38 -0700
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.58,236,1286175600"; d="scan'208";a="90171944"
Received: from nasanexhub06.na.qualcomm.com ([129.46.134.254]) by ironmsg02-R.qualcomm.com with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-MD5; 25 Oct 2010 08:32:06 -0700
Received: from nasanexhc09.na.qualcomm.com (172.30.39.8) by nasanexhub06.na.qualcomm.com (129.46.134.254) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.83.0; Mon, 25 Oct 2010 08:30:43 -0700
Received: from nalasexhub04.na.qualcomm.com (10.47.130.55) by nasanexhc09.na.qualcomm.com (172.30.39.8) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.218.12; Mon, 25 Oct 2010 08:30:43 -0700
Received: from NALASEXMB04.na.qualcomm.com ([10.47.7.118]) by nalasexhub04.na.qualcomm.com ([10.47.130.55]) with mapi; Mon, 25 Oct 2010 08:30:43 -0700
From: "Laganier, Julien" <julienl@qualcomm.com>
To: Philip Homburg <pch-6man@u-1.phicoh.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 08:30:37 -0700
Subject: RE: Consensus call on adopting <draft-krishnan-6man-rs-mark-08.txt>
Thread-Topic: Consensus call on adopting <draft-krishnan-6man-rs-mark-08.txt>
Thread-Index: ActyjkzGCcfNuu2bT3SAt6Ei1ihM1gBygzBg
Message-ID: <BF345F63074F8040B58C00A186FCA57F29F6C36D97@NALASEXMB04.na.qualcomm.com>
References: <3F7E0126-76FB-43BA-B25F-1EE226FA73AA@gmail.com> <79ECC38B-B7AD-47B1-B6A4-E0B4F75B91F1@gmail.com> <m21v7icp8p.wl%randy@psg.com> <m1P9IGH-0001fnC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <4CC19ACF.5070706@ericsson.com> <m1P9IZF-0001gMC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <4CC1A3A5.9040209@ericsson.com> <m1P9J7Y-0001VwC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <4CC1A846.4030605@ericsson.com> <m1P9KDC-0001iFC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net> <BF345F63074F8040B58C00A186FCA57F29F6C36D06@NALASEXMB04.na.qualcomm.com> <m1P9ZgA-0001fnC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
In-Reply-To: <m1P9ZgA-0001fnC@stereo.hq.phicoh.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: IPv6 WG Mailing List <ipv6@ietf.org>, Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 15:31:08 -0000

Philip Homburg wrote:
> 
> In your letter dated Fri, 22 Oct 2010 10:25:45 -0700 you wrote:
> >Philip Homburg wrote:
> >> In your letter dated Fri, 22 Oct 2010 11:05:42 -0400 you wrote:
> >> I wonder what to make of that. If the SEND protected RS messages can
> >> be replaced with AN-initiated (unprotected) RS messages, then what
> >> purpose does protecting those messages serve in the SEND framework?
> >
> > The customer host will receive a SEND protected RA, which makes it
> > possible to validate that it comes from a legitimate router (via 
> > certificates validation) and is not being replayed (via timestamps.)
> 
> This implies that the end-device has to be able to match RS messages
> using timestamp, i.e. its clock has to be sufficiantly accurate (to within
> 5 minutes, according to the SEND RFC) to do that or (in the case of
> failure) you would get hard to diagnose problems. 

That would be a failure of SEND that is orthogonal to the presence of the mechanism described in <draft-krishnan-6man-rs-mark-08.txt>.

> An end-device that requires its own nonce would fail similarly.

If the end-device wants to receive a solicited RA containing "its own nonce", it sends an RS with said nonce, the AN encapsulates the RS up to the edge router, the edge router replies with an RA containing the nonce.
 
> I think the draft needs more text about the interaction with SEND in
> the case of failure.

I disagree -- I do not see what in the mechanism described in <draft-krishnan-6man-rs-mark-08.txt> affects SEND failure modes.

--julien

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email